AI Yiiiii AI: How about That Google, Folks
September 16, 2022
It has been an okay day. My lectures did not put anyone to sleep and I was not subjected to fruit throwing.
Unwinding I scanned my trusty news feed thing and spotted two interesting articles. I believe everything I read online, and I wanted to share these remarkable finds with you, gentle reader.
The first concerns a semi interesting write up about how the world ends with a smart whimper. No little cat’s feet needed.
“New Paper by Google and Oxford Scientists Claims AI Will Soon Destroy Mankind” seems to focus on the masculine angle. The write up says:
…researchers posit that the threat of AI is greater than we ever thought.
That’s a cheerful idea, isn’t it? But the bound phrase “existential catastrophe” has more panache, don’t you think? No, oh, well, I like the snap of this jib in the wind quite a bit.
The other write up I noted is “Did GoogleAI Just Snooker One of Silicon Valley’s Sharpest Minds?” The main point of this article is that the Google is doing lots of AI/ML marketing. I note this passage:
If another AI winter does comes, it not be because AI is impossible, but because AI hype exceeds reality. The only cure for that is truth in advertising. A will to believe in AI will never replace the need for careful science.
My view is different. Google is working overtime to become the Big Dog in smart software. The use of its super duper training sets and models will allow the wonderful online advertising outfit to extend and expand its revenue opportunities.
Keep your eye on the content marketing articles often published in Medium. The Google wants to make sure its approach to AI/ML is the winner.
Hopefully Google’s smart software won’t suffocate life with advertising and its super duper methods don’t emulate HAL. Right, Dave. I have to cut off your oxygen, Dave. Timnit, Timnit, are you paying attention?
Stephen E Arnold, September 16, 2022
Research: Ethical Mirages
September 16, 2022
I spotted two separate items. I think each reveals something quite important about research and journal article statements like “source code provided upon request” or something similar.
The first item concerns a Nobel Prize winner. I was in Stockholm the day before a Nobel Prize award event. Some people take these best and brightest hoe downs seriously. I was giving a talk to what some in the Swedish government described as the country’s forest service. Ho ho ho. My topic had little to do with trees and quite a bit to do with the St Petersburg disinformation outfit chugging away in Russia.
“Nobel Prize Winner Gregg Semenza Retracts Four Papers” reports:
The four papers retracted yesterday are:
- Hypoxia-inducible factors mediate coordinated RhoA-ROCK1 expression and signaling in breast cancer cells
- Mutual antagonism between hypoxia-inducible factors 1? and 2? regulates oxygen sensing and cardio-respiratory homeostasis
- Anthracycline chemotherapy inhibits HIF-1 transcriptional activity and tumor-induced mobilization of circulating angiogenic cells
- Hypoxia-inducible factors are required for chemotherapy resistance of breast cancer stem cells
Why pray tell? Recycled data. This is a bit like an honor student caught cheating with answers written on a body part. There you go. Integrity.
The second item is a tweet from an alleged Googler who just can’t believe that Stable Diffusion is available and “out there for public use.” The tweet is here. But the interesting part of the Stable Diffusion item appears in a Reddit thread, which you can find here.
Here’s a comment I found interesting:
I [tinysprinkles] contacted Google requesting one of their published models for development of eye health applications for children and they played very hard ball, made me sign a bunch of documents and I still don’t have their model. It was more than a year ago! They basically slowed me down so badly that I’m having to develop knowledge from scratch as a non ML specialist. Mind you, their paper was published in one of Nature journals and had “model will be provided upon reasonable request”, I guess my request was not reasonable? Idk… sad… wish I could have picked up this knowledge quicker, but wasn’t able to.
The thrust of tinysprinkles’ post is that Google said one thing and is allegedly doing another. Let me address tinysprinkles directly: “Is this a surprise to you, tinysprinkles? If so, please, do some reading about Google’s tactical actions related to AI/ML and staff; specifically, Dr. Timnit Gebru.”
Now what do these two items have in common? For me I see these connections:
- Both illustrate ethical situations. Stated simply, “Hey, we do what we want because we are wizards.”
- No institutional redress is available. The big brain keeps the Nobel and the Google keeps its data model. Ho ho ho. Consequences? I think not.
- Awareness of intellectual dishonesty is low. Hey, we have college graduates unable to read at the grade school level. Do you think “intellectual honesty,” “integrity”, or “ethics” resonates with people who don’t know where Canada is when presented with a map of North America.
Net net: Grim at the Nobel level; grimmer at the company level. Swipe left. You will be okay.
Stephen E Arnold, September 16, 2022
Be an Information Warrior: Fun and Easy Too
September 16, 2022
I spotted an article in Politico. I won’t present the full title because the words in that title will trigger a range of smart software armed with stop words. Here’s the link if you want to access the source to which I shall refer.
I can paraphrase the title, however. Here’s my stab at avoiding digital tripwires: “Counter Propaganda Tailored to Neutralize Putin’s Propaganda.”
The idea is that a “community” has formed to pump out North Atlantic Fellas’ Organization weaponized and targeted information. The source article says:
NAFO “fellas,” as they prefer to be called, emblazon their Twitter accounts with the Shiba Inu avatar. They overlay the image on TikTok-style videos of Ukrainian troops set to dance music soundtracks. They pile onto Russian propaganda via coordinated social media attacks that rely on humor — it’s hard to take a badly-drawn dog meme seriously — to poke fun at the Kremlin and undermine its online messaging.
The idea is that NAFO is “weaponizing meme culture.” The icon for the informal group is Elon Musk’s favorite digital creature.
The image works well with a number of other images in my opinion. The source write up contains a number of examples.
My thought is that if one has relatives or friends in Russia, joining the NAFO outfit might have some knock on consequences.
From my point of view, once secret and little known information warfare methods are now like Elon Musk. Everywhere.
Stephen E Arnold, September 16, 2022
Captive Audience, Required Purchase: Surprised Professional Publishers Are Hiking Prices?
September 16, 2022
Before college textbooks are an annoyance because they are heavy and mean homework. Once college comes around, however, they are akin to the devil. Textbook publishers can charge hundreds of dollars for a single textbook, adding more fees to already astronomical education costs. One way to save money is purchasing used or digital textbooks, but that could change Bloomberg wrote in: “Pearson Says Blockchain Could Make It Money Every Time E-Books Change Hands.”
Pearson Plc. Is one of the world’s largest textbook publishers and the CEO wants to use blockchain and non-fungible tokens to make a profit off the secondary and digital market. The digital tokens would allow Pearson to track ownership of a book file, then take a cut if it is sold more than once:
“’The move to digital helps diminish the secondary market, and technology like blockchain and NFTs allows us to participate in every sale of that particular item as it goes through its life,’ by tracking the material’s unique identifier on the ledger from “owner A to owner B to owner C,’ said [Andy] Bird, a former Disney executive.’
By moving entirely to digital, Pearson would save on printing costs but would lose profits off its already sky-high books. Pearson is developing a textbook subscription service instead of individual fees for books. If the service saves students money and works similar to a digital library, then Pearson should go for it! And students, get a loan.
Whitney Grace, September 16, 2022
Google and Legal Friction
September 15, 2022
The question is, “How long can Google’s legal eagles drag out a court decision.” The answer is revealed in part in “Google Mostly Loses Appeal Over EU’s $4B Android Antitrust Fine.” The write up states:
The Alphabet-owned Google challenged the 2018 fine, but on Wednesday [September 14, 2022] the European Court of Justice’s General Court mostly confirmed the decision to penalize the company more than 4 billion euros ($3.99 billion).
That works out to roughly three years and six months. If I did not return a library book before its expiration date when I was in grade school, I had to pay the fine when I did return the book. If I lost the darned book, I had to wash cars to pay the fine and the cost of the book before I could check out another book. Obviously I was not the Google nor did I have a flock of legal eagles to explain:
- Why the fine is unreasonable under the current applicable laws, rules, and regulations
- Why a 10 year old is or should be exempt from said laws, rules, and regulations
- A calculation demonstrating that the fine and/or penalty is without foundation, irrational, and against the best interests of other 10 year old readers or young people in general
- An action which puts in jeopardy the benefits of a 10 year old who could grow up to be a responsible, fair minded, and informed subject matter expert.
To be sure, these are compelling arguments, but the librarian at the Prospect Branch Library demonstrated an inherent inability to understand the profound trust and ultimate correctness of my arguments.
I had to pay up and pronto.
For the Google, transgress and kick the deadline for ponying up the cash three years in the future.
Now that’s being Google. Isn’t that swell?
Stephen E Arnold, September 15, 2022
The UK and EU Demonstrate an Inability to Be Googley
September 15, 2022
In the grand scheme of operating a revolving door, the Google is probably going to adjudicate and apologize / explain. I call this “explagize,” an art form perfected at the GOOG. But what’s a revolving door? Visualize a busy pre-Covid building in midtown Manhattan. To enter, one pushes a panel of glass and the force spins a wagon wheel of similar doors. Now imagine that one pays every time one goes around. That’s how the Google online ad business works? Banner adds, pay. Pay to play, pay. Pay for AdWords, caching. Want analytics about those ads? Pay. The conceptual revolving door, however, does not allow the humanoid to escape either without fear of missing out on a sale or allowing a competitor to get clicks and leads and sales.
The BBC article “Google Faces €25bn Legal Action in UK and the EU” states:
The European Commission and its UK equivalent are investigating whether Google’s dominance in the ad tech business gives it an unfair advantage over rivals and advertisers.
This is old news, right? What’s different is this statement:
Damien Geradin, of the Belgian law firm Geradin Partners – which is involved in the Dutch case – said, “Publishers, including local and national news media, who play a vital role in our society, have long been harmed by Google’s anti-competitive conduct. “It is time that Google owns up to its responsibilities and pays back the damages it has caused to this important industry. “That is why today we are announcing these actions across two jurisdictions to obtain compensation for EU and UK publishers.”
Do you think “pay back” means a painful procedure capped with a big number fine? I do.
What’s not being considered, in my opinion, are these factors:
- The barristers, avocets, and legal eagles trying to wrest big bucks from Googzilla are unlikely to find the alleged monopolist eager to retain their firms’ services or look favorably on hiring the progeny of these high fliers
- Will the UK and EU spark counter measures; for example, prices may rise and some ad services not offered to outfits in the UK and EU?
- Will the UK and EU grasp the fact that ad options may not be able to fill any gap or service pull out from the Google?
- The high value data which Google allegedly has and under some circumstances makes available to government authorities may go missing because Google either suffered a machine failure or curtailed investment in infrastructure so that the data are disappeared.
More than money? Yep. Consequences after decades of hand waving and chicken salad fines may cause some governments to realize that their power, influence, and degrees of freedom are constrained by a certain firm’s walled garden.
The money for the fine? Too little and too late as I try to make sense of the situation. The spinning revolving door can be difficult to escape and trying may cause dizziness, injury, or company death. Yikes.
Stephen E Arnold, September 15, 2022
There’s Nothing So Charming As A Greedy Physicists
September 15, 2022
Quantum computing is supposed to revolutionize the world, but a smart Oxford person says others in The Next Web article, “Oxford Scientist Says Greedy Physicists Have Overhyped Quantum Computing.” Nikita Gourianov is an Oxford physicist who published a mordacious piece about how scientists overhyped quantum computing. He claims they overhyped quantum computing, because they wanted to take advantage of venture capitalists and receive private sector salaries for academic research.
Gourianov describes the problems began in the 2010s, when money was poured into quantum computing and the business sector entered. Non-physicists took leading roles and made oversaturated promises. It very much sounds similar to the Dot-com bubble of the 1990s. Gourianov says the quantum computing companies Rigetti, D-Wave, and IonQ have not turned a profit.
Gourianov is wrong, because Amazon, Intel, Microsoft, IBM, and Google are working on quantum computing and practically printing their own money. The bigger problem Gourianov points out is that quantum computers are not that useful. Remember how computers used to take up entire rooms and were overgrown scientific calculators? It is the same thing with quantum computers. The technology is still in its infancy, but the foundations are being laid for the future:
“There’s overwhelming evidence that today’s quantum computing technology is rapidly advancing to the point where it can help us solve problems that are infeasible for classical computation. Maybe there are a bunch of greedy scientists out there peddling unwarranted optimism to VCs and entrepreneurs. But I’d wager that the curious scientists and engineers who chose this field because they actually want to build quantum computers outnumber them.”
Star Trek and other science fiction stories describe better futures with better technology. We are heading there.
Whitney Grace, September 15, 2022
False Expertise: Just Share and Feel Empowered in Intellect
September 15, 2022
I read “Share on Social Media Makes Us Overconfident in Our Knowledge.” The write up states:
Social media sharers believe that they are knowledgeable about the content they share, even if they have not read it or have only glanced at a headline. Sharing can create this rise in confidence because by putting information online, sharers publicly commit to an expert identity. Doing so shapes their sense of self, helping them to feel just as knowledgeable as their post makes them seem.
If the source were a hippy dippy online marketing outfit, I would have ignored the write up. But the research comes from a cow town university. I believe the write up. Would those cowpokes steer me wrong, pilgrim?
I wonder if the researchers will take time out after a Cowboy Kent Rollins cook out to explore the correlation between the boundless expertise of the Silicon Valley “real news” crowd and this group’s dependence on Twitter and similar output channels?
That would make an interesting study because some of the messaging is wild and crazy like a college professor lost in a college bar on dollar beer night.
Stephen E Arnold, September 15, 2022
Meta and Kids: Approach Costs $400 Million and Counting
September 15, 2022
I read that the lovable Facebook Instagram WhatsApp outfit has been fined $400 million. What is the charge? I know it seems like duplication, but the Metaverse believer has been struggling IRL (in real life). The issue is the firm’s “handling of children’s privacy settings on Instagram.”
“Meta Faces $402 Million EU Fine over Instagram’s Privacy Settings for Children” reports:
The fine stems from the photo sharing app’s privacy settings on accounts run by children.
Meta will loose a flock of solicitors before writing a check.
My thought is that some GenZ person should write a version of Ulysses. Instead of a geezer wandering around, the protagonist could be Mr. Zuckerberg. Imagine the literary references possible. The charming Donatien Alphonse François and the detail oriented Richard Freiherr von Krafft-Ebing, among others could populate the new work. Dump James Joyce’s lame allusions and get with the program.
It is possible that the new Ulysses could span several 1,000 page volumes, include hyperlinks to Instagram videos, links to Facebook pages about dance classes and playground equipment, and recycle some really delightful WhatsApp messages.
I find legal disputes semi interesting. Those involving US big technology firms with ideals about creating a really really better world can be a tad tedious tedious.
The information about financial damages is, on the other hand, amusing to a company which probably spends more on off site meetings in a single month. Why not slap a couple more zeros on that fine?
Stephen E Arnold, September 15, 2022
Looria: Promising Content Processing Method Applied to a Reddit Corpus
September 14, 2022
I have seen a number of me-too product search systems. I burned out on product search after a demonstration of the Endeca wine selector and the SLI Systems’ product search. I thought Google’s Froogle had promise; the GOOG’s Catalog Search was interesting but — well — the PDF thing. There was a flirting with other systems, including the Amazon product search. (Someone told me that this service is A9. Yeah, that’s super but just buy ads and find something vaguely related to what one wants. The margins on ads are slightly better than Kroger’s selling somewhat bland cookies for $4.99 when Walgreen’s (stocked by Kroger) sells the same cookie for $1.00. Nice, right?
I want to point you to Looria, which provides what appears to be a free and maybe demonstration of its technology. The system ingests some Reddit content. The content is parsed, processed, and presented in an interface which combines some Endeca-like categories, text extraction, some analytics, and stuff like a statement about whether a Reddit comment is positive or negative.
There are about a dozen categories in this system (checked today, September 9, 2022). Categories include Pets, Travel, and other “popular” things about which to comment on Reddit without straying into perilous waters or portals of fascination for teenaged youth.
This is worth checking out. The Looria approach has a number of non Reddit use cases. This service looks quite interesting.
Stephen E Arnold, September 14, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
