Why Did I Change DarkCyber?
March 31, 2022
This week we made available an interview with a senior manager of an intelware company. At lunch, a person asked me why I changed the editorial coverage of DarkCyber and reduced the number of videos I made available.
I sang my favorite song, “I am 77 and the days dwindle down.” The he/she/them ate the burrito and the conversation shifted to electric vehicles.
There is another reason for my focus on interviews. A good example of my rethink appears in “Ubiquiti Seeks $425 Million in Damages Against Industry Blogger Brian Krebs.” The main idea is that writing about cyber security can open the cages of the legal eagles.
The write up reports:
Ubiquiti on Tuesday filed a lawsuit against industry blogger Brian Krebs for $425 million in damages for allegedly falsely accusing the company of “covering up” a cyber attack. According to the complaint, Krebs intentionally misled the public about a data breach and a subsequent blackmail attempt.
I don’t know the particulars of this legal allegation. I do know that I am skeptical of many of the claims made by cyber security firms. The PowerPoint decks are so darned convincing until something goes south.
At my age, I would rather interview people about their products; hence, the shift in the DarkCyber focus. I will continue to ask questions and write what I think is super funny commentary on the information I locate via open sources.
That’s the separating the goose feathers from the giblets. Plus, who wants to deal with the hassles of explaining that the methods of a blogger writing about security are not up to snuff.
I will speak with Tibby and Pepita about their research methods later today. They are usually more interested in delivery vans than online research, but these comprise my research team.
Stephen E Arnold, March 31, 2022
Do Amazon and Google Shape Information to Advance Their Legislative Agenda?
March 31, 2022
The meeting in which it was decided to fund the Connected Commerce Council must have been fun: High fives, snorts of laughter, and derogatory comments perhaps? CNBC, a most interesting source of real 21st century news, published “How Google and Amazon Bankrolled a Grassroots’ Activist Group of Small Business Owners to Lobby Against Big Tech Oversight.” This is not a high school essay about “How to Make a Taco.” Nope. If true, the write up explains how two companies funded an information management campaign. I would describe this a weaponized propaganda, but I live in rural Kentucky and I am luck if I can remember where I left my bicycle. (Answer: in the garage.)
The write up explains:
The Connected Commerce Council, which pitches itself as a grassroots movement representing small business owners, is actually a well-financed advocacy group funded by tech heavy hitters Google and Amazon.
Interesting.
Here’s the newsy bit:
Lobbying watchdog group the Campaign for Accountability called 3C an “Astroturf” lobbying organization, thanks to the tech giants’ financial support. That’s a bit of Washington slang for a group that claims to represent grassroots entities, but in reality serves as an advocate for big industry. It’s a tactic used in Washington to push for specific legislative or regulatory goals using the sympathetic face of mom and pop organizations. The Campaign for Accountability described 3C in a 2019 report as an “Astroturf-style front group for the nation’s largest technology companies.”
Let’s think about the meeting or meetings which made it possible for two big outfits conclude that weaponizing content was a peachy keen idea. Some questions:
- When will the regulators emulate their European brothers, sisters, and thems and make meaningful steps to deal with cute weaponizing plays like this one?
- Why do executives sign off on such content manipulation — excuse me, I mean public interest messaging? Confidence in their ability to let loose flocks of legal eagles, a “hey, why not” attitude, or a belief in their own infallibility. (CNBC is not exactly Bellingcat, right?)
- Is it a disconnect between ethical behavior and high school science club insouciance?
These are good questions, and I don’t have answers.
The write up includes this remarkable quotation from a Connected Commerce big wheel:
In a statement to CNBC, Connected Commerce Council Executive Director Rob Retzlaff said all of the group’s members “affirmatively sign up – at events, online, or through a personal connection – and thousands have opened emails, responded to surveys, attended meetings and events, and communicated with legislators.” Retzlaff said, “I sincerely hope you do not (a) mischaracterize our efforts or the views of small businesses by suggesting we are an astroturf organization that puts words in people’s mouths, or (b) use outdated membership information to distract readers from legitimate concerns of small businesses and their engagement with policymakers.”
I like the “sincerely hope.”
Read the original. I think the article is a thought starter.
Oh, one more question:
Why didn’t Google just filter search results to add sauce to the Max Miller recreation of Genghis Khan’s fave little meat cakes? Low profile and the perfect explanation: The algorithm makes its own decisions.
Sure, just like the people in the meeting that concluded disinformation and propaganda to preserve the nifty cash machines that make astroturfing useful.
Stephen E Arnold, March 31, 2022
AI Neural Networks: A Mathy Explanation of Close Enough for Horseshoes
March 31, 2022
If you are comfortable with math, you will find the information in “The Difficulty of Computing Stable and Accurate Neural Networks: On the Barriers of Deep Learning and Smale’s 18th Problem.” If you have a snapshot of Steve Smale, a fellow who interacted with one of my relatives, you may be familiar with his problems. Smale’s contribution to Vladimir Arnold’s request were supposed to be the 21st century equivalent to Hilbert’s problems. The cited paper focuses on problem 18. The idea is addressing the limits of computational intelligence.
If you are into SAIL, Snorkel, and Google’s efficiency approach based on oodles of data and synthetic data, you will find Smale’s 18th problem a bit annoying. (The same, I have been told, was a characteristic of my relative who one labored for the somewhat quirky Andrey Kolmogorov.) Smale’s sniveling 18th is not an issue with the Googley DeepMind.
If you are not familiar with this group of people and their mathy concerns, you probably will find an NCAA basketball game a more enjoyable way to spend an hour or two.
Here’s my summary: Good enough is okay. For gooder enough, human (for now) interventions may be required. What if the outputs are off the mark? Close enough for horseshoes — and reducing costs.
Stephen E Arnold, March 31, 2022
Google: Grade A Search Baloney
March 31, 2022
I have been involved in online information for more than 50 years. Yep, folks, That’s more than half a century. Those early days involved using big clunky computers to locate a word in a Latin corpus. Then there were the glory days of commercial online products like Business Dateline, the Health Reference Center, and others. The Internet was a source of online craziness that trumped the wackiness of Ev Brenner and his vision for petrochemical data. Against this richly colored tapestry of marketing fabrications, overpromising and under delivering, and the bizarre fantasies of the “old” Information Industry Association I read “Google Search Is Actually Getting Better at Giving You What You Need.”
The write up channels a marketing person at the Google and mixes the search wizard’s recycling of Google truisms with some pretty crazy assertions about finding information in 2022.
Let’s take a look at three points and then step back and put these online advertising charged assertions in a broader context; namely, of the outcomes of a a system which is a de facto information monopoly.
Here are the points I noted in the write up:
Big, baby, big.
The first idea is that Google processes a great deal of information. Plus, Google tests to tackle the challenge of “search quality.” By the way, what does “quality” mean? What happens when you combine big with quality, you get really good outputs from the Google system. Just try it. Do a search for pizza via Google on a mobile device. See what you get? Pizza information. Perfect. So big and quality means good. Do you buy that?
The second idea is that Google like little beavers or little Googzillas works to improve quality. The idea is that yesterday’s Google was not bad; it needs improvement. Many improvements mean that quality goes up. Okay, let’s try it. Say you want information about a loss of coolant accident. You know. Chernobyl, Fukashima, et al. Type in loca and you get Shakira’s video. Type in “nuclear loca” and you get links to a loss of coolant accident. Type in site:nrc.gov loca and you get results specific to a loss of coolant incident. Note what’s needed to get Google to produce something about loss of coolant accident. The user must specify a context; otherwise, Google delivers lowest common denominator results. One can use Google Dorks to work about the Shakira problem, but let’s face it, very few people are into Google Dorks. (I include them in my OSINT lecture at the National Cyber Crime Conference in April 2022, but I know from experience that not even trained investigators are into Google Dorks.)
The third idea is that Google is embracing artificial intelligence. That makes sense because there are not enough people to process today’s flows of information in the old fashioned subject matter expert way. One must reduce costs in order to deliver “quality.” Does that seem an unusual pairing of improvements and search results? Think about it, please.
Now let’s step back. Here are some observations I jotted on a 4×6 notecard:
- Google uses people looking for online information to generate revenue from ads. That which produces more ad revenue is valued. The “quality” is a repurposing of a useful concept to the need to generate revenue. Shakira is the correct result for the “loca” query. That’s quality.
- The notion of testing is interesting. What’s the objective? The answer is generating revenue. Thus, the notion of testing is little more than steering or tuning search results to generate more revenue. The adjustments operate on several levels: Shaping understanding via filtering and producing revenue from search results. Simple, just not exactly what a user of an ad supported system thinks about when running a query for pizza.
- Smart software is the number one way for Google to [a] reduce costs, [b] deflect legal challenges to its search result shaping with the statement “The algorithm does, not a human”; and [c] create the illusion that Google search results are really smart. Use Google and you will be smarter too.
Believe these assertions? You’re the ideal Google user. Have doubts? You are not Googley. Don’t apply for a job at the Google and for heaven’s sake, don’t expect the Google outputs to be objective, just accept that some information is unfindable by design.
Google Dorks exist for a reason? Google has made finding relevant information more difficult than at any time in my professional career. And every year, the Google system becomes more detached from what most people believe fuels Google’s responses to what Google users need.
Yep, need. Sell ads. Reduce costs. Generate feedback into the system from user’s who have biases. Why are government agencies pushing back on outfits like Google? The quest for qualilty? Nope. The pushback reflects a growing awareness of disinformation, manipulation, and behavior that stifles options in my opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, March 31, 2022
COVID-19 Made Reading And Critical Thinking Skills Worse For US Students
March 31, 2022
The COVID-19 pandemic is the first time in history remote learning was implemented for all educational levels. As the guinea pig generation, students were forced to deal with technical interruptions and, unfortunately, not the best education. Higher achieving and average students will be able to compensate for the last two years of education, but the lower achievers will have trouble. The pandemic, however, exasperated an issue with learning.
Kids have been reading less with each passing year, because of they spend more time consuming social media and videogames. Kids are reading, except they are absorbing a butchered form of the English language and not engaging their critical thinking skills. Social media and videogames are passive activities, Another problem for the low reading skills says The New York Times in, “The Pandemic Has Worsened The Reading Crisis In Schools” is the lack of educators:
“The causes are multifaceted, but many experts point to a shortage of educators trained in phonics and phonemic awareness — the foundational skills of linking the sounds of spoken English to the letters that appear on the page.”
According to the article, remote learning lessened the quality of learning elementary school received on reading fundamentals. It is essential for kids to pickup the basics in elementary school, otherwise higher education will be more difficult. Federal funding is being used for assistance programs, but there is a lack of personnel. Trained individuals are leaving public education for the private sector, because it is more lucrative.
Poor reading skills feed into poor critical skills. The Next Web explores the dangers of deep fakes and how easily they fool people: “Deep fakes Study Finds Doctored Text Is More Manipulative Than Phony Video.” Deep fakes are a dangerous AI threat, but MIT Media Lab scientists discovered that people have a hard time discerning fake sound bites:
“Scientists at the MIT Media Lab showed almost 6,000 people 16 authentic political speeches and 16 that were doctored by AI. The sound bites were presented in permutations of text, video, and audio, such as video with subtitles or only text. The participants were told that half of the content was fake, and asked which snippets they believed were fabricated.”
When the participants were only shown text they barely discovered the falsehoods with a 57% success rate, while they were more accurate at video with subtitles (66%) and the best at video and text combined (82%). Participants relied on tone and vocal conveyance to discover the fakes, which makes sense given that is how people discover lying:
“The study authors said the participants relied more on how something was said than the speech content itself: ‘The finding that fabricated videos of political speeches are easier to discern than fabricated text transcripts highlights the need to re-introduce and explain the oft-forgotten second half of the ‘seeing is believing’ adage.’ There is, however, a caveat to their conclusions: their deep fakes weren’t exactly hyper-realistic.”
Low quality deep fakes are not as dangerous as a single video with high resolution, great audio, and spot on duplicates of the subjects. Even the smartest people will be tricked by one high quality deep fake than thousands of bad ones.
It is more alarming that participants did not do well with the text only sound bites. Dd they lack the critical thinking and reading skills they should have learned in elementary school or did the lack of delivery from a human stump them?
Students need to focus on the basics of reading and critical thinking to establish their entire education. It is more fundamental than anything else.
Whitney Grace, March 31, 2022
The Artificial Intelligence Balloon: Leaking a Bit, Eh?
March 30, 2022
I noted “Enterprise AI Needs to Deliver Real Value As Adoption Slows.” I am not able to define “real value,” but let’s not quibble. The write up reports that a survey from a publisher / conference organizer / Silicon Valley luminary has identified what might be a leaking hyperbole balloon.
I noted:
The latest annual AI Adoption in the Enterprise survey from O’Reilly finds that over the last two years the number of organizations with AI applications in production has remained steady at 26 percent. However, many enterprises still lack AI governance. Among respondents with AI products in production, the number of those whose organizations have a governance plan in place to oversee how projects are created, measured, and observed (49 percent) is roughly the same as those that don’t (51 percent).
But AI is the next big thing. Innovation will soar. Employees will be wallowing in extra time to do “human things.” Money will flow.
These statements are indeed true for Amazon, Facebook, Google, and a handful of other outfits. But for Bob’s Trucking Company or small accounting firm in the Rust Belt, well, not so much it seems.
The reason may be nestled in this comment in the article:
For years, AI has been the focus of the technology world,” says Mike Loukides, vice president of content strategy at O’Reilly and the report’s author. “Now that the hype has died down, it’s time for AI to prove that it can deliver real value, whether that’s cost savings, increased productivity for businesses, or building applications that can generate real value to human lives. This will no doubt require practitioners to develop better ways to collaborate between AI systems and humans, and more sophisticated methods for training AI models that can get around the biases and stereotypes that plague human decision-making.”
What’s the fix? Remediation of algorithmic biases, a shift to NFT innovation, or online gambling?
Those are questions for the little people. The largely unregulated giants are happy to do the smart software thing. Big value is well understood by these firms’ management teams.
Stephen E Arnold, March 30, 2022
TikTok: Interesting Assumptions and Opinions
March 30, 2022
I am not a TikTok’er. I have an attention span better suited to books, the old fashioned paper artifacts not so popular among certain younger humanoids. I read “The TikTok-Oracle Deal Would Set Two Dangerous Precedents.” The main argument in the write up is that “a global data shortage melee” could erupt. I am not sure what a data storage mêlée would look like. One dictionary defines a mêlée as a ruction. Another offers a lively contention. Let’s assume the write up is based on fact, deeply informed by rigorous search, and absolutely actual factual.
I noted a couple of statements which I found interesting; to wit:
- “The deal would establish precedents likely to harm technology companies and their users.”
- “The costs are worth bearing because they will give TikTok the freedom to compete on its greatest strength: its product.”
- “If the US government succeeds in forcing TikTok to enter this local data-storing arrangement with Oracle, other governments will be more likely to impose comparable requirements on US companies operating within their borders.”
- “The evidence that TikTok posed a national security threat has always been flimsy at best.”
- “Absent evidence of security risks, regulators should allow American and Chinese tech companies to compete without government interference.”
- If the rumored deal between TikTok and Oracle becomes a reality, TikTok will quietly celebrate while other Big Tech firms brace for escalating product battles with one of their strongest competitors.
Some observations are now offered for each of these statements:
- A couple of examples might be helpful.
- What’s the evidence supporting the assertion that China centric firms compete on the “greatest strength”?
- What about governments imposing such requirements on firms; for example, Google and Facebook operations in China.
- What evidence? Why is it flimsy?
- This is an opinion. Are these some facts supporting the assertion?
- Who is the strongest competitor? Oracle? China? Outfits like Amazon, Google, and Microsoft?
I would add one other question: What is the scope of Oracle’s business involvement with China and Chinese supported entities?
Stephen E Arnold, March 30, 2022
Marketing Is Getting Harder And Experts Sell Whatever
March 30, 2022
Selling in a digital landscape is harder now than anytime before. In order to succeed, sellers require marketing to get attention for their goods and services. Marketing had become complex and Read Write details how in, “Marketing Is Getting More Difficult. Here’s Why.” The basics of marketing are related to the amount of the, money and effort people place into their campaign. When marketing becomes more difficult, it consumes more time and resources. It is also harder for beginners to pick up concepts and it is also harder for anyone to stand out from competition.
People are bombarded with ads everywhere, especially on the Internet. They are often ignored and mostly annoying. Old marketing techniques do not work anymore. Modern consumers prefer organic, personalized content that tells a story. Technology is another factor that makes marketing harder, including the expense, learning said technology, misusing it, and misleading metrics.
It is not impossible to be successful, only harder and it is good to remain adaptable, diversify strategies, and stay agile to avoid competition:
“Marketing is getting more difficult. That much is certain. But you can at least find solace in the fact that it’s not just getting harder for you; it’s getting harder for all of us. We are entering a new era of marketing and advertising, and that’s not necessarily a bad thing period it just means you need to remain adaptable and attentive if you want your tactics to generate a meaningful return.”
The article gives fresh, positive advice. Fortunately it does not lead into a magic wand sales pitch for how a specific marketing service. Experience, research, and giving campaigns a try is how to get marketing done.
Agencies are ready to help. For a price. And it is easy… to send invoices that is.
Whitney Grace, March 30, 2022
Microsoft Search: Getting Better and Better
March 30, 2022
In early versions of Windows operating systems, the search function stank worse than rotting garbage in summer. Since the initial Windows deploy, Microsoft has improved the search function and as technology advances there are still upgrades to be made says Make Use Of in: “Microsoft Is Making Windows 11’s Search Function Better Than Ever.” In a refreshing take on its past mistakes, Microsoft admits that its former search tools were not the best. When it comes to Windows 11, Microsoft revamped the search into a quality tool and does not plan to rest on its laurels.
One of the best upgrades with the newest Windows 11 patch is the that search will be streamlined between work/business accounts. The search function will locate items on all accounts. Microsoft is also adding lifestyle widgets to make the OS more entertaining, such as a “word of the day” and altering users to Microsoft Reward offerings. Search will also take the place of Facebook and inform users of important dates, such as birthdays, anniversaries, and holidays. Whenever Microsoft releases a new Windows version, they do their best to get users to adopt the new OS:
“When Microsoft releases a new operating system, it always faces the same challenge. Users and businesses are comfortable with their operating system of choice, and now the Redmond tech giant has to convince them to upgrade to the newer one. The best way to do that is to make an operating system that improves upon the old one’s formula. As such, Microsoft’s touch-ups to Windows 11’s Search tool may be an effort to convince people to leave Windows 10 behind and adopt the newer, shinier system.”
Microsoft has a poor track record when it comes to system upgrades. They have a pattern of every other OS being a bad. Windows users might want to stick with Windows 10 a little longer and wait until Windows 12. It would be nice if Microsoft also added database search options like specific date, file name, Boolean, etc.
Whitney Grace, March 30, 2022
TikTok: Search and Advertising
March 29, 2022
If life were not tricky enough for Amazon, Facebook, and Google, excitement is racing down the information highway. I read “TikTok Search Ads Tool Is Being Tested Out.” I learned:
This week, the famous short video application began beta testing for TikTok search ads in search results, allowing marketers to reach the audience utilizing the keywords they use.
Yep, a test, complete with sponsored listings at the top of the search result page.
Will this have an impact on most adults over the age of 65? The answer in my opinion, “Is not right away, but down the road, oh, baby, yes.”
Let’s think about the Big Boys:
- Amazon gets many clicks from its product search. The Google once dominated this function, but the Bezos bulldozer has been grinding away.
- Facebook or as I like to call it “zuckbook.” The combined social empire of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp has quite a bit of product information. Don’t you follow Soph Mosca’s fashion snaps on Instagram? Will TikTok search offer a better experience with search, ads, and those nifty videos? Yep.
- And Google. Now the GOOG faces competition for product search ads from the China linked TikTok. How will the company respond? Publish a book on managing a diverse work force or put out a news release about quantum supremacy.
The write up explains that the ads, the search angle, and the experience is in beta. Will TikTok sell ads? Okay, let me think. Wow. Tough question. My answer, “Does President Gi take an interest in the Internet?”
The write up includes a link to a Twitter post which shows the beta format. You can view it at this link.
I want to point out that TikTok is a useful source of open source intelligence, captures information of interest to those who want to pinpoint susceptible individuals, and generates high value data about users interested in a specific type of content and the creators of that content.
Now TikTok will be on the agenda of meetings at three of the world’s most loved companies. Yep, Amazon, Facebook, and Google. Who loves these outfits the most? Advertisers!
Stephen E Arnold, March 29, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
