Australia: A Harbinger of Investigative Capability
February 11, 2022
Australia is a country which has been a pioneer in some investigative methods. Another innovation has been described in “Home Affairs Says Online Account Takeover Powers Now in Use.” The write up states:
…the Australian Federal Police and Australian Criminal Intelligence Commission have access to three new warrants to tackle serious crime enabled by anonymising technology. The warrants allow the agencies to take control of a person’s online account, as well as add, copy, delete or alter material to disrupt criminal activity and collect intelligence from online networks.
Australia is a participant in the Five Eyes’ group. Others in that federation are likely to monitor how Australia’s innovation works in the real world. Worth watching.
Stephen E Arnold, February 11, 2022
Israeli Law Targets Palestinian Content Online
February 11, 2022
A piece of legislation that was too heavy-handed for even former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is now being revived. On his Politics for the People blog, journalist Ramzy Baroud tells us “How Israel’s ‘Facebook Law’ Plans to Control All Palestinian Content Online.” The law, introduced by now-justice minister and deputy prime minister Gideon Sa’ar, would allow courts to order the removal of content they consider inflammatory or a threat to security. Given how much Palestinian content is already removed as a matter of course, one might wonder why Sa’ar would even bother with the legislation. Baroud writes:
“According to a December 30 statement by the Palestinian Digital Rights Coalition (PDRC) and the Palestinian Human Rights Organizations Council (PHROC), Israeli censorship of Palestinian content online has deepened since 2016, when Sa’ar’s bill was first introduced. In their statement, the two organizations highlighted the fact that Israel’s so-called Cyber Unit had submitted 2,421 requests to social media companies to delete Palestinian content in 2016. That number has grown exponentially since, to the extent that the Cyber Unit alone has requested the removal of more than 20,000 Palestinian items. PDRC and PHROC suggest that the new legislation, which was already approved by the Ministerial Committee for Legislation on December 27, ‘would only strengthen the relationship between the Cyber Unit and social media companies.’ Unfortunately, that relationship is already strong, at least with Facebook, which routinely censors Palestinian content and has been heavily criticized by Human Rights Watch and other organizations.”
This censorship by Facebook is codified in an agreement the company made with Israel in 2016. This law, however, goes well beyond Facebook. We also learn:
“According to a Haaretz editorial published on December 29, the impact of this particular bill is far-reaching, as it will grant District Court judges throughout the country the power to remove posts, not only from Facebook and other social media outlets, ‘but from any website at all’.”
The write-up rightly positions this initiative as part of the country’s ramped-up efforts against the Palestinians. But we wonder—will this law really only mean the wanton removal of Palestinian content? If history is any indication, probably not. Baroud reminds us that measures Israel originally applied to that population, like facial recognition tech and Pegasus spyware, have found their way into widespread use. One cannot expect this one to be any different.
Cynthia Murrell, February 11, 2022
NSO Group: Former Police Chief Demos Yoga One-Handed Tree Pose
February 10, 2022
Remember the NSO Group? If not, this post is not for you. I read a story from the scary Associated Press. The outfit said it would sue anyone who quoted too much of the richness of its stories. As a former employee of the Courier-Journal & Louisville Times Co., I am pretty easily frightened by outfits like the AP.
The story — should you be able to locate it online — is “Ex-Israeli Police Chief Dismisses Claims of Spyware Hacking.” The write up is typical AP stringer wonderfulness. The main point is that the 58 year old Roni Alsheikh made a video to explain that chatter, allegations, and assertions about alleged use of the NSO Group’s Pegasus specialized service tool was different. I believe this person; however, you may not. That’s okay.
An investigation is underway, and my hunch is that if — note the if — the NSO Group’s system was used, it was within the boundaries of authorized behavior. Innocent until proven guilty, not guilty by PR focused GenXers.
Now is the story spot on? Who knows.
My take on the write up is:
- The MBA-inspired drive for revenue created the NSO Group’s marketing and positioning. Big booths and compelling demos are powerful things, particularly when not shrouded in secrecy.
- The “sunlight” flooding the specialized software and services industry is spill over from the Silicon Valley behavior model. Yo, bro, problemo.
- The yoga exercise the one handed tree thing is not something 58 years olds do before having a morning mouthful of matzah brei.
The one-handed tree pose. It’s tough, correct? The NSO Group helped Roni Alsheikh get in this remarkable position. How long can one “hold” it? I would be able to do two, maybe three seconds with a couple of my research team propping me up.
NSO Group is creating interesting opportunities for retired law enforcement professionals. It’s the difficulty of the pose that is interesting to contemplate.
Stephen E Arnold, February 10, 2022
New York Times May Be Embracing the High School Science Club Management Method
February 10, 2022
I read “New York Times Opposes Tech Staff Push to Organize.” The write up from the always-objective outfit owned by the esteemed information kingpin Rupert Murdoch reports:
Danielle Rhoades Ha, a spokeswoman for the Times, said the company didn’t voluntarily recognize a technology union because it would be ‘an unproven experiment with lasting implications.’”
The Guardian reported in “Leaked Messages Reveal New York Times’ Aggressive Anti-Union Strategy” stated on February 1, 2022:
Meredith Kopit Levien, the chief executive of the New York Times Company, wrote a memo on 19 January circulated to staff titled “Why a Tech Union Isn’t Right for Us” on the tech workers’ union election at XFun, the group within the New York Times responsible for product development operations. “In short, we don’t believe unionizing in XFun is the right move. But that’s not because I’m anti-union,” said Kopit Levien. In the memo, Kopit Levien cited the origin of the XFun group and its growth, and attributed any disconnect workers might be feeling to working apart during the pandemic. She also cited Wirecutter’s union as a warning sign for unionization.
From my vantage point in rural Kentucky, the Manhattan centric dust up is amusing. We have the Gray Lady, who wants to expand its online subscription business, reduce costs via adoption of smart software, and a staff of professional who are quite sharp. One might say really woke.
My hypothesis is:
- Workers are divided into classes; that is, the “real” journalists and the others.
- The others sense that they are like Google marketing and legal professionals: Down the management crafted totem pole.
- The union effort is one way to try and put up a Chinese wall so that jobs can be defended. (If the wall is like the nifty one in China, it will demonstrate the skills of those who built it. You have to respect that Chinese wall even though it is tough to ride a horse from Point A to Point B on the top of the wall.)
The result is that the traditional publishing wants its class structure. It wants to be digitally hip as the XFun vivifies. However, the others are not in the game plan.
So far New York Times’ management team have taken decisions which remind me of the moves employed by Facebook- and Google-like outfits in Silicon Valley. The shallowness of the approach creates drama.
Drama makes news. News is good. The publicity may not be so beneficial. The lasting implications, however, may be great for the not-real-journalists. Despite snappy podcasts, “real” journalists may not be able to select, optimize, and maintain the smart systems the Gray Lady wants and needs. Talking about technology is not the same as doing technology in my experience.
Stephen E Arnold, February 10, 2022
Meta Algorithm Can Now Grok Like The Best Of Us
February 10, 2022
AI algorithms are far from decrying the robot revolution, but each day brings us closer towards more intuitive technology. For example, The Register shares that “Meta Trains Data2vec Neural Network To Grok Speech, Images, Text So It ‘Can Understand The World.’”
Meta researchers, formerly Facebook, say they developed a new algorithm model, dubbed data2vec, to decipher speech, classify objects, check grammar, and even perform accurate sentimental analysis. Are you grokking this? The news brief reads like a description from a Heinlein science-fiction novel! However, Meta is pushing the boundaries of AI science and data2vec is certainly not fiction.
Instead of training data2vec on one data model, it was trained on three: images, text, and speech. While data2vec interprets data from three models, it processes them separately. Data2vec is a transformer-based neutral network and is designed to be self-supervised to learn patterns in audio, NLP, and computer vision:
“The model learns to operate with different types of data by learning how to predict how the representation of data it’s given; it knows it has to guess the next group of pixels when given an image, or the next speech utterance in audio, or fill in the words in a sentence.”
Data2vec is different from other AI algorithms because of how it separately processed data:
“ ‘We train separate models for each modality but the process through which the models learn is identical,’ Alexei Baevski, a research engineer at Meta AI told The Register. ‘We hope that it will enable future work to build high performing self-supervised models that combine modalities and are more effective than specialized models. Different modalities can add additional information to the same piece of content – for example body language from video, prosodic information from audio, and text can combine into a richer representation of a dialog. The algorithms that currently try to combine multi-modal information exist but they do not yet perform well enough to replace specialized algorithms and we hope our work will help change that.’”
Instead of using the same multi-modal information design, Meta AI approached the problem differently. In order for data2vec to gain a grokking ability, Meta AI broke down the process and simplified how the algorithm learned. The concept is similar to breaking down a lego construction to its individual bricks, then being rebuilt with data on how and why each brick works in its specific place.
Meta AI is closer to making AI capable of human, even Martian grokking. That is grokking unbelievable.
Whitney Grace, February 10, 2022
Microsoft: Apple Must Be Stopped
February 10, 2022
I read “Microsoft Says That If Apple Isn’t Stopped Now, Its Antitrust Behavior Will Just Get Worse.” Amazing if the information in the write up is accurate. The article states as “real” news:
Microsoft has filed an amicus brief supporting Epic Games in its appeal against Apple, and argues that, “the potential antitrust issues stretch far beyond gaming.”
But here’s the killer passage from a write up provided to legal eagles as a friend to one and all:
Microsoft’s amicus filing included below, sets out what it describes as its own “unique – and balanced – perspective to the legal, economic, and technological issues this case implicates.” As a firm which, like Apple, sells both hardware and software, Microsoft says it “has an interest” in supporting antitrust law. Describing what it calls Apple’s “extraordinary gatekeeper power,” Microsoft joins Epic Games in criticizing alleged errors in the original trial judge’s conclusions.
Okay, Microsoft had a run in with some anti-trust types a few years ago. Apple, like Facebook and Google, are increasing their communication efforts among the duly elected government officials.
But Microsoft wants to buy a game company even though there are signals that the deal for an enlightened and responsible firm will be subject to scrutiny. The mom and pop stores which look out the the little people want to make sure that the alleged monopolists don’t prevent other alleged monopolists from dominating certain markets.
How helpful. From my point of observation, one company operating in an allegedly unfair manner is probably is a good spot to recognize another outfit using the same playbook.
And how about those revenues? There’s nothing like a secure, customer oriented, friendly data environment! Some might call this hypocritical; others, ironical.
I am a simple oldster. I call it — what’s the word? “Criminal”. No. Maybe “diabolical?” No. Not that word. How about “maniacal”? Yeah, not the best but I need to check the latest Microsoft security alert on the for fee Apple news service now. Wait, wait. How about “asocial?”
Stephen E Arnold, February 10, 2022
Google, Its Googley Communication, and the Corporate Supported Universities: Time to Pay Up?
February 9, 2022
Have you been looking for an example of Silicon Valley thought processes? I would like to suggest that you look at three “content objects”.
The first is an announcement in a Google blog (yes, there are many Google blogs and keeping track of them is difficult because the Google search function is not retrieving certain content in my experience. Google information is one subject that tough to locate.)
Here’s the link to an article posted one year ago in February 2021, deep in the heart of Covid: https://blog.google/outreach-initiatives/education/google-workspace-for-education/
Here’s the link to the Twitter thread which provides one university professionals view of a Google policy change: https://twitter.com/bwjones/status/1490802506628145153
And, finally, here is the link to the Hacker News’ thread: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30264617
The main point of the Google post is to explain in Google speak the fact that universities will no longer be able to upload data to Google for free once the threshold of 100 terabytes has been crossed. Google is busy generating as much sustainable revenue as possible because the shadows of the legal eagles are interrupting the work-from-home routines of full time Googlers and the on premises Googlers who want to play volley ball without bird shadows flicking across the courts.
Here’s an example:
We remain committed to providing all institutions around the world with a best-in-class experience, including ample free storage to support quality educational experiences.
But… and the but is:
We will contact impacted institutions directly in the coming weeks to discuss a range of options for getting the storage they need. Large institutions will be provided supplemental storage later this year and all schools can gain additional storage through Education Plus and the Teaching and Learning Upgrade.
Google cares about selling storage. The shift to a for fee model is buried. Here’s the first paragraph of the Googley notice:
During the 15 years we’ve been building tools for educators, we’ve seen the needs of instructors, education leaders and students evolve. We’ve learned that a one-size-fits all approach isn’t what educators need from tools like G Suite for Education. Whether you’re in a rural elementary school, urban university or homeschool setting, our technology and tools should adapt so you can focus on what matters most: teaching and learning. That’s why we’re making a few changes to provide you greater choice and flexibility in selecting the best tools to empower your institution.
Tears come to my eyes when I read this. Google. Really. Does. Care. Chromebooks, free online search, and so much more.
The tweet stream reveals that at least one university information technology type person did not get the email, the phone call from a Googler, or a link in Google search results to a query about price hikes, the speed of data downloads, the possibility of research data loss, and the changes that would make life tough for a researcher relying on Googzilla to hold outputs from a radio telescope. Nope. Here’s one tweet from the interesting thread:
Dan Isbell posted:
“Storage is not being consumed equitably across – nor within – institutions, and school leaders often don’t have the tools they need to manage this.” Dan adds, “So Google will save us from ourselves by capping data. In the name of equity. Storage doesn’t grow on trees but c’mon.”
I think this means that Google, which may be a monopoly type operation, knows when to shift to a pay-to-play model and knows what’s best for education.
The third link points to different takes on this shift. Examples range from alleging that Google is using an MBA acceptable method labeled “bait and switch,” a phrase used by d3nj4l.
Blagie on Hacker News stated:
.. I think I’ve been screwed over enough times by Google now that I would never, ever, ever, ever, ever rely on them for anything where I expect business continuity. I’ve done too much business with Google to ever do business with Google.
A Xoogler, allegedly named, Tuckereman, offered this comment:
I don’t think Google is always the most thoughtful with things like this…
This Xoogler is obviously not Googley; otherwise, he would understand that the systems and methods are specifically designed to produce results after a public announcement is made. As long as sufficient time elapses between the semi cheerful announcement of the policy change and the actual change being implemented, Google is in the clear. I can hear one of the Big Dog Googlers saying: “Senator, thank you for the question. We did announce the policy change one year before implementing that change. And we implemented the change incrementally. We are supportive of education at all levels, and we want to offer programs that improve the quality of education by offering options.”
I don’t have a dog in the fight. After two decades of ignoring the influence of technology centric firms, legislators and regulators are, like Rip Van Winkle, waking up.
For the affected universities, just calculate how many graduates work at Google. Go to Google and explain that more Google support is needed. What if an institution is not one from which Google hires numerous individuals? Well, too bad for the school. For professors, get a job at Stanford, MIT, Harvard, and others at the top of the leader board. Time to add lock in to the administrative vocabulary and delete free lunch?
Stephen E Arnold, February 9, 2022
Google Speak: The Map Thing
February 9, 2022
I have a Kia and I have an old TomTom. I do not use maps from any of the mom and pop providers like Apple or Google. Why? I appreciate these alleged monopolies efforts to make my life so much better, I am okay muddling along as I have for the past 77 years.
I read “How Reviews on Google Maps Work.” The word “work” when employed by Google troubles me. For example, I don’t want a “work” space which requires me to figure out how to disable tracking which seems to forget my preferences. So “work” is a red flag at least for me.
The explanation is a good example of Google speak, the language of the Googley and those whom Google has misdirected. I have one old chestnut anecdote about Google Maps. Several years ago, I was giving a talk at a conference in Washington, DC. My team had met with the slightly frazzled conference organizer to suggest some topics for future conferences. After the meeting, I said I had to run an errand and floated the idea to eat at a restaurant called Cuba Libre. My colleagues and the big conference person whipped out their phones to figure out where the restaurant was. In fact, at that time Cuba Libre was two blocks from the hotel.
I arrived at the restaurant and waited outside for the three other people. None showed up. I called and said, “Where are you?” The answer from two was, “We’re looking for the restaurant. It’s not on Google Maps.” I gave verbal directions and called the super important conference fellow who said, “I couldn’t find the restaurant. I am on the way home. Maybe next time?” (There never was a next time.)
The two members of my team walked up to me and said, “Google did not have a listing for Cuba Libre.” I said, “No problem.” When I returned to my office, I poked around. Cuba Libre was not listed. I called the restaurant and asked for the manager. I asked that person, “Do you advertise via Google or list yourself in Google Local?” The answer was, “No.” I concluded that Google’s definition of “keep the information on Google relevant and accurate” means, “No ads. You don’t exist.”
The phrase “keep the information on Google relevant and accurate” comes from the write up “How Reviews on Google Maps Work.” To achieve relevance and accuracy, Google goes to great lengths. I learned:
As the world evolves, so do our policies and protections. This helps us guard places and businesses from violative and off-topic content when there’s potential for them to be targeted for abuse.
Well, if a business is not listed that is a sure fire way to solve the problem of reviews.
Google, with its one main revenue stream, relies on machine learning to absolve those tireless Googlers of certain tiresome tasks; for example, editorial controls, researching businesses in the heart of Washington, DC, and doing the accuracy thing.
The write up explains this deep diving, snorkel infused mechanism:
Machines are our first line of defense because they’re good at identifying patterns. These patterns often immediately help our machines determine if the content is legitimate, and the vast majority of fake and fraudulent content is removed before anyone actually sees it.
Okay.
I liked the lingo in the final paragraph of the write up:
With more than 1 billion people turning to Google Maps every month to navigate and explore, we want to make sure the information they see — especially reviews — is reliable for everyone. Our work is never done; we’re constantly improving our system and working hard to keep abuse, including fake reviews, off of the map.
Except for some businesses.
Stephen E Arnold, February 9, 2022
Facebook Has Dictator-Like Control Of Platform
February 9, 2022
Russia is not shy when it comes to criticism. Russians usually target rival governments and politicians, but when they are driven it is not odd for a company or business leader to be in their critical crosshairs. Sputnik News is a Russian news service and it criticized Facebook for blocking it: “Muting Sputnik Arabic: Facebook Control Is Something Any Dictator Would Dream Of, Analysts Say.”
It is ironic that Facebook, a US-based company, where the first amendment in the Constitution’s Bill of Rights guarantees the right to freedom of speech, blocked the Arabic account of a Russian news outlet. If you did not catch the ironic bit, Russian is the former Soviet Union and as a socialist country it censored any undesirable information. Facebook Concierge Support did not explain why it blocked Sputnik’s Arabic account other than there was “potential non-compliance.” The Sputnik Arabic account has never been blocked, but some of its post have been flagged for “violating community standards.”
Facebook has silenced ideas it does not agree with in the past and this is yet another example of them doing it again. Facebook does not care about remaining neutral, the company only cares about its bottom line and controlling information.
Facebook whistleblower Ryan Hartwig said:
“ ‘The message from Facebook is clear: they have carte blanche to interfere in elections, influence politics, and control the news that Middle Easterners can be exposed to,’ Hartwig highlights. ‘This type of unilateral control of news and propaganda is only something dictators have dreamed of, and it’s being foisted on sovereign countries in the Middle East.’ According to the whistleblower, Facebook’s conduct is “extremely dangerous” because the platform is used by a substantial portion of netizens. ‘Free speech essentially doesn’t exist for the 3 billion users of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp,’ Hartwig stresses.
Facebook is a platform and a medium of discourse. It does not have the right to enact censoring in order to control the narrative. Instead Facebook is taking center stage in censorship as well as purporting that state-linked media is bad while privately owned social media is good.
Fortunately Facebook is already viewed as a toxic brand and younger generations see it as dated and meant for Baby Boomers. Facebook continues to control an interest in the media narrative, but time will erode its hold. It is too bad we have to wait for Facebook to lose its grip, but congratulations to Zuckerberg for drawing criticism from Russia! That is one heck of an accomplishment!
Whitney Grace, February 9, 2022
The FLoc Disperses: Are There Sheep Called Topics?
February 9, 2022
It looks like that FLoC thing is not working out for Google after all, so now it is trying another cookie-alternative called Topics. According to Inc., with this move, “Google Just Gave You the Best Reason Yet to Finally Quit Using Chrome.” Writer Jason Aten explains:
“Google said it would introduce an alternative known as Federated Learning of Cohorts, or FLoC. The short version is that Chrome would track your browsing history and use it to identify you as a part of a cohort of other users with similar interests. … The thing is, no one likes FLoC. Privacy experts hate it because it’s not actually more private just because the tracking and profiling happens in your browser. Advertisers and ad-tech companies don’t like FLoC because, well, they like cookies. They’d mostly prefer Google just leave things alone since cookies are what let them know exactly when you click on an ad, put something in your cart, and buy it. Now, Google is introducing an alternative it calls Topics. The idea is that Chrome will look at your browsing activity and identify up to five topics that it thinks you’re interested in. When you visit a website, Chrome will show it three of those topics, with the idea that the site will then show you an ad that matches your interest.”
Of course, all Chrome users will be enrolled in Topics by default. Google will provide a way to opt out, but it is well aware most users will not bother. If privacy is really important, why not just do away with targeted advertising altogether? Do not be silly—ad revenue is what Google is all about, even when it tries to pretend otherwise. Aten notes that Safari and Brave both allow users to block third-party cookies and neither had planned to support FLoC. Other browsers have ways to block them, too. According to this write-up, it is time to give up on Chrome altogether and choose a browser that actually respects users’ privacy.
Cynthia Murrell, February 10, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
