Fun Zuckbook Fact: TikTok Content Is Really Popular on Facebook
September 5, 2022
I read “It Sure Must Sting for TikToks to Be the Some of the Most Viewed Links on Facebook.” The article is quite interesting, and I want to highlight it because it reveals an interesting facet of online behavior.
The write up points out:
In its newly-released second quarter “Widely Viewed Content Report,” which focuses on U.S. content that appears in users’ feeds, Meta reported that TikTok.com—literally, just the link to the domain itself—accounted for 35.9 million views in users’ feeds. TikTok also made it into Facebook’s most widely viewed domains, where it took the fourth spot, garnering 108 million views.
If accurate, this is like buying a Wall Street Journal for business news and finding that 20 percent or more of the “content” was Google ads for Alphabet services. Where’s the news? one might ask. Well, the presence of the Google full page advertisements is the news in my opinion. But the analogy is imperfect because Facebook’s users are promoting TikTok for free!
I found this statement both interesting and amusing:
… a good chunk of the content being viewed on Facebook is reposted stuff from somewhere else, yesterday’s tired memes. (I’m not talking about posts from your high school friends or your Aunt Dolores, but rather the videos, media, information, etc.) This was echoed by Technology Review, which also noted that the content on Facebook is very spammy.
Observation:
- Facebook is promoting its users to use TikTok… inadvertently.
- New, interesting content is appearing on TikTok. Does this mean Facebook is subliminally suggestion, “Hey, go directly to TikTok and get this stuff in real time?”
- TikTok may be allegedly China-linked but the firm has lawyers. Is this reposting functioning as a stream of useful data and setting up Meta for a copyright allegation of improper reuse?
I am not sure is “must sting” captures what this situation causes. Kidney stone, colonoscopy, or something similar.
Stephen E Arnold, September 5, 2022
Amazon and Fake Reviews: Ah, Ha, Fake Reviews Exist
September 5, 2022
I read “Amazon’s Delay for the Rings of Power Reviews on Prime Video Part of New Initiative to Filter Out Trolls.” The write up makes reasonably official the factoid that Amazon reviews are, in many cases, more fanciful than the plot of Rings of Power.
The write up states:
The series appears to have been review bombed — when trolls flood intentionally negative reviews for a show or film — on other sites like Rotten Tomatoes, where it has an 84% rating from professional critics, but a 37% from user-submitted reviews. “The Rings of Power” has been fending off trolls for months, especially ones who take issue with the decision to cast actors of color as elves, dwarves, hand waves and other folk of Tolkien’s fictional Middle-earth.
Amazon wants to be a good shepherd for truth. The write up says:
Amazon’s new initiative to review its reviews, however, is designed to weed out ones that are posted in bad faith, deadening their impact. In the case of “A League of Their Own,” it appears to have worked: To date, the show has an average 4.3 out of 5 star rating on Prime Video, with 80% of users rating the show with five stars and 14% with one star.
Interesting. My view is that Amazon hand waves about fake reviews but for those which could endanger its own video product. Agree with me or not, Amazon is revealing that fake reviews are an issue. What about those reviews for Chinese shirts which appear to have been fabricated for folks in the seventh grade? SageMaker, what’s up?
Stephen E Arnold, September 12, 2022
ISPs and Network Providers: The Big Warming
September 5, 2022
On September 14, 2022, I will be sharing some of my team’s research about ISPs and network providers. Coincidentally, the “open” information services are providing interesting — but as yet not yet rock solid information — about the ISP and network provider world. In a sense, figuring out what ISPs and network providers are doing is like looking at distant star data in the Webb space telescope data stream. There is information flowing, but making those data speak clearly is not an easy job.
I read “I Ran the Worlds Largest DDOS for Hire Empire and CloudFlare Helped.” The write up struck me as quite interesting. I circled this pass as interesting but not backed up with footnotes or cheerful hyperlinks:
As the infrastructure provider for over 20% of all www traffic traversing the internet today, CloudFlare is in a position to enforce it’s beliefs on a global scale. Most of the time this isn’t a problem, lots of nefarious websites try to take advantage of the services CloudFlare offers and are rightfully kicked off. The problems arise in a small category of websites that blur the line.
The “blur” seems to say to me: Hey, we are big and well known, and maybe some bad actors use our service.”
Here’s another sentence which may catch the attention of legal eagles:
As someone who has previously justified their actions by saying “I am not directly causing harm, the responsibility flows downstream to my end users” I can tell you it is a shaky defense at best. The situation would be different if CloudFlare was unaware of the booter websites they are offering protection to, but that is not the case. CloudFlare knows who they are protecting and chooses to continue doing so, being fully cognizant of the end result their actions will have. Let’s talk about that end result because the hypocrisy of it all stings like a slap in the face as I type this. CloudFlare is responsible for keeping booter websites online and operating, the very same websites who’s sole purpose is to fuel CloudFlare’s very own business model, selling DDoS protection.
I am no lawyer and I certainly don’t understand anything other than my dinobaby world. However, it seems as if a big company is allegedly in a position to do more to protect truth, justice, and the American way than it may be doing. Oh, the American way means operating without meaningful oversight, regulation, and the invisible ethical hand that makes stakeholders quiver with glee.
Worth watching what other ISP and network provider examples emerge as the real journalists reach their coffee shops and begin working this subject.
Stephen E Arnold, September 5, 2022
One Tiny Point about Oracle
September 5, 2022
When silicon valley-type real news outfits “correct” one another, we tend to wonder why. In this case, it appears Gizmodo writer Matt Novak feels readers should know one key bit of information omitted by a recent Vox article: the fact that “Larry Ellison’s Oracle Started As a CIA Project.” He writes:
“Vox simply says that Oracle was founded in ‘the late 1970s’ and ‘sells a line of software products that help large and medium-sized companies manage their operations.’ All of which is true! But as the article continues, it somehow ignores the fact that Oracle has always been a significant player in the national security industry. And that its founder would not have made his billions without helping to build the tools of our modern surveillance state.”
One of those tools, of course, being the sort of database Oracle specializes in. The write-up emphasizes Ellison’s longstanding belief in a large federal database, asserting the attacks of 9/11 gave the tech tycoon the chance to push his vision. Novak quotes:
“‘The single greatest step we Americans could take to make life tougher for terrorists would be to ensure that all the information in myriad government databases was copied into a single, comprehensive national security database,’ Larry Ellison wrote in the New York Times in January of 2002. ‘Creating such a database is technically simple. All we have to do is copy information from the hundreds of separate law enforcement databases into a single database. A national security database could be built in a few months,’ Ellison explained. ‘A national security database combined with biometrics, thumb prints, hand prints, iris scans or whatever is best can be used to detect people with false identities.'”
We are not sure whether Novak is suggesting Vox deliberately downplayed Oracle’s role in facilitating a surveillance state infrastructure. He certainly wants us to know the company’s fortunes rose after that fateful day in September 2001, with federal government contracts making up 23 percent if its licensing revenue in 2003 to the tune of $2.5 billion. We are reminded Oracle’s David Carney stated in 2002, while trying but failing to avoid sounding callous, that 9/11 had been good for business. Perhaps Vox did not believe this facet of Oracle’s history to be relevant, but Gizmodo can consider us, dear readers, duly informed.
Cynthia Murrell, September 5, 2022
Facebook: A Tipping Point and Meta Math
September 2, 2022
I am not going to recycle the financial analysts’ reports about Facebook revenue and “profit.” Nor will I comment on Apple’s decapitation of certain Facebook money spinning. Instead I want to suggest that my research team and I have formulated the notion that Facebook is approaching or at its tipping point.
The evidence to support this fanciful idea is sparse, just two data points. After all, how quickly can a multi billion dollar dorm room dating app disappear when grandmas and grandpas use it to keep in touch with their middle aged “kids.” (Note that grandmas call their female friends “girls.” Amusing indeed.)
Let’s look at the two items of data, quickly of course because this is a free collection of blog posts without advertising or sponsorship. That’s not something one can say about other creators’ outputs.
First, navigate to this story: “Why is Instagram Dying? We Asked 100 Gen Z Users to Compare TikTok vs. Reels.” The write up reveals the results of semi Gen X/Millennial survey. It is pointless to comment about sample size, sample selection, and methodology. Let’s just look at a single finding from the report assuming the modern day math is sort of accurate.
The key bar indicates (without numbers, for sure) that TikTok has better algorithms. The finding, which I assume to be like other Internet-centric content, super accurate. Facebook is not doing numerical recipes in a tasty way.
But Facebook’s switchblade drone move is the chatter about charging users for access to what was a “free” service. As Jack Benny used to say, “Yipe.” “Meta’s Plans to Charge for Facebook and Instagram Could Be the Final Nail in Their Coffins” states:
With Instagram’s currently experiencing a low point due to some unwelcome features, offering a paid option could be the last straw for many, and cause them to move to other social platforms.
What’s the second factor? I have pointed out that the estimable Zuckster is happy to chatter away with a sticker sales professional. However, “Zuckerberg Targeted by House GOP Eager to Probe Hunter Biden” suggests that the Zuckster will have an opportunity to use his famous line “Congressperson, that you for that question. I am sorry I don’t have knowledge of the information. I will send the data you request to your office.” Will the elected officials welcome with enthusiasm an explanation from the highly regarded former liberal democrat leader from the UK to explain how alleged messages from an investigative body were understood by those really social Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram professionals? Dulcet tones may not be what the Congressional representatives want to hear, but who knows? Maybe the British politician can handle the annoying questioners from the Colony.
Will one and one equal three? One is TikTok and two is the opportunity to answer questions about a slippery political topic. My hunch is that the added value to reach three (a truly wonderful prime) is the ad revenue. If this tipping point is reached the one plus one may resolve to mysterious negative sum.
Worth watching. The Zuck is entertaining to observe from my vantage point in rural Kentucky. It will be instructive to watch how the math resolves at the Meta tipping point. The one plus one could result in a new magic number called the zuckup. One plus one equals a zuckup. I am not sure it will find much favor in some cohorts, particularly among TikTok users.
Stephen E Arnold, September 2, 2022
Open Source: Everyone Uses It. Now Bad Actors Know Where to Aim
September 2, 2022
Peace of mind is a valuable thing, a commodity one might think worth allocating some funds to ensure, particularly when one is engaged in permanent cyber warfare. Yet, according to BetaNews, “80 Percent of Enterprises Use Open Source Software and Nearly All Worry About Security.” A recent report from Synopsys and based on research by Enterprise Strategy Group found 80% of enterprises use open source software (OSS), and 99% of those are concerned about related security issues. Apparently one percent is not paying attention—such worry is justified because few in the IT department know what’s in the open source libraries or know how to find manipulated or rogue instructions. Reporter Ian Barker tells us:
“In response to high profile supply chain attacks 73 percent of respondents say they have increased their efforts significantly to secure their organizations’ software supply chain. Steps taken include the adoption of some form of multi-factor authentication technology (33 percent), investment in application security testing controls (32 percent), and improved asset discovery to update their organization’s attack surface inventory (30 percent). Despite those efforts, 34 percent of organizations report that their applications have been exploited due to a known vulnerability in open source software within the last 12 months, with 28 percent having suffered a previously unknown zero-day exploit found in open source software.
Pressure to improve software supply chain risk management has shone a spotlight on software Bills of Materials (SBOMs). But exploding OSS usage and lackluster OSS management has made the compilation of SBOMs complex — the ESG research shows that 39 percent of survey respondents marked this task as a challenge of using OSS. … [The study also found] 97 percent of organizations have experienced a security incident involving their cloud-native applications within the last 12 months.”
All this, and the use of open source software is expected to jump to 99% next year. It seems those who hold organizational purse strings care more about saving a few bucks than about their cybersecurity teams’ sleepless nights. If they suffer a breach, however, they may find that metaphoric purse has acquired a large hole. Just a thought, but an ounce of prevention may be warranted here.
Cheap and easy? Yep.
Cynthia Murrell, September 2, 2022
Star Power and Crypto: Fading Magnetism
September 2, 2022
Cryptocurrencies are a mystery to most people. One would think they would have gone by the wayside, however, faithful followers are still chugging along mining coins. Unfortunately social media influencers who are experts in digital currencies were paid to promote them and they lied to their views. The guilt has now set in says NBC News in “Some Social Media Influencers Are Being Paid Thousands To Enforce Cryptocurrency Projects.”
Ben Armstrong of the BitBoy Crypto YouTube channel was paid to promote DistX as his “coin of choice.” DistX turned out to be a scam and investors were left high and dry. The currency is now worth less than a penny. Armstrong and other influencers are paid tens of thousands of dollars to promote cryptocurrencies.
Armstrong stated he was upfront about products he was paid to promote. Unfortunately many YouTubers are not as honest as him. He also refunded investors of DistX with his promotion fees. Years ago YouTubers did not have to disclose they were paid to promote products, but now they are supposed to state when content is sponsored. Some bad-acting YouTubers fail to follow guidelines.
Politicians are even getting involved:
“But state regulators warn that there are still influencers who lack transparency. Joe Rotunda, the director of the enforcement division of the Texas State Securities Board, said he’s seen paid promotions that are not only undisclosed but are pushing fraudulent ventures.
Rotunda and a team of regulators recently filed enforcement actions against two casinos in the metaverse, the new digital frontier where users can attend virtual concerts, purchase digital assets or even gamble at a casino.”
Cryptocurrencies are predicted to fail even more in the coming years. Why not stick to better forms of investment than risking it all on “get rich quick schemes?” Will the endorsers find their actions a future legal issue?
Whitney Grace, August September 2, 2022
Bots Are Hot
September 2, 2022
Developer Michael I Lewis had noble intentions when he launched searchmysite.net in 2020. Because Google and other prominent search engines have become little more than SEO and advertising ambushes, he worked evenings and weekends to create a search engine free from both ads and search engine optimization. The site indexes only user-submitted personal and independent sites and leaves content curation up to its community. Naturally, the site also emphasizes privacy and is open source. To keep the lights on, Lewis charges a modest listing fee. Alas, even this principled platform has failed to escape the worst goblins of the SEO field. Lewis laments, “Almost All Searches on my Independent Search Engine Are Now from SEO Spam Bots.”
SEO spam lowers the usual SEO trickery into the realm of hacking. It’s black hat practitioners exploit weaknesses, like insecure passwords or out-of-data plugins, in any website they can penetrate and plant their own keywords, links, and other dubious content. That spam then rides its target site up the search rankings as long as it can, ripping off marks along the way. If the infiltration goes on for long, the reputation and ranking of the infected website will tank, leaving its owner wondering what went awry. The results can be devastating for affected businesses.
In spring of 2022, Lewis detected a suspicious jump in non-human visitors on searchmysite.net. He writes:
“I’ve always had some activity from bots, but it has been manageable. However, in mid-April 2022, bot activity started to increase dramatically. I didn’t notice at first because the web analytics only shows real users, and the unusual activity could only be seen by looking at the server logs. I initially suspected that it was another search engine scraping results and showing them on their results page, because the IP addresses, user agents and search queries were all different. I then started to wonder if it was a DDoS attack, as the scale of the problem and the impact it was having on the servers (and therefore running costs) started to become apparent. After some deeper investigation, I noticed that most of the search queries followed a similar pattern. … It turns out that these search patterns are ‘scraping footprints’. These are used by the SEO practitioners, when combined with their search terms, to search for URLs to target, implying that searchmysite.net has been listed as a search engine in one or more SEO tools like ScrapeBox, GSA SEO or SEnuke. It is hard to imagine any legitimate white-hat SEO techniques requiring these search results, so I would have to imagine it is for black-hat SEO operations.”
Meanwhile, Lewis’ site has seen very little traffic from actual humans. Though it might be tempting to accuse major search engines of deliberately downplaying the competition, he suspects the site is simply drowning in a sea of SEO spam. Are real people browsing the Web anymore, as opposed to lapping up whatever social media sites choose to dish out? A few, but they are increasingly difficult to detect within the crowd of bots looking to make a buck.
Cynthia Murrell, September 2, 2022
Zuck Play: Joe Rogan In, Judge Chhabria Out
September 1, 2022
I read “Facebook to Settle Cambridge Analytica Suit, Save Zuckerberg From Testifying.” The title caught my attention for two reasons.
First, Mr. Zuckerberg, the affable wizard of Meta stuff, appeared on the Joe Rogan Podcast. On that podcast, he talked about many things. Since I don’t pay for podcasts, I have only second hand information. For me, the key point was he talked.
Joe Rogan stickers are available by clicking the tasteful image in this blog post. Beyond Search does not have a deal with either Mr. Rogan or Amazon. (I have very good reasons for this posture.)
Second, Mr. Zuckerberg did not talk to the legal eagles associated with the Cambridge Analytica matter in the Northern District of California court. To avoid having to talk, Mr. Zuckerberg’s estimable outfit paid money to the United Kingdom (500,000 pounds or about $560,000) and an unknown amount to the Northern District of California court.
I assume this image is the property of Meta and Facebook.
I wonder why.
Mr. Rogan’s background shares one thing with the Zuck: DNF or did not finish college. Mr. Rogan’s occupation according to the rock-solid Wikipedia is “Podcaster, color commentator, comedian, actor, and television presenter.”
The Honorable Vince Chhabria has an okay background too; to wit: A law degree from UC Berkeley, law clerk for Justice Stephen G Breyer, work at a so so law firm called Covington & Burling, and some work as the Deputy City Attorney for Government Litigation as the Co Chief of Appellate Litigation.
On the surface, it seems that the Zuck feels more comfortable with a color commentator than a college graduate who probably is not too good at martial arts, kite sailing, and social media.
My take: Mr. Meta is looking for an audience which may be slightly less skeptical of the wondrous “bring us together” methods of the social media quasi-monopolies.
That’s just a guess. Podcasting is probably less challenging to a Silicon Valley luminary than talking to some wonk who reads books, depositions, and legal documents. I wonder if the bright star of Meta picked up some of Mr. Rogan’s merchandise. I am thinking maybe these two trend setters swapped tchotchkes.
Stephen E Arnold, September 1, 2022
BelenderBot: A Peculiar Pattern Indeed
September 1, 2022
Ah well. Consider us unsurprised. Mashable reports “It Took Just One Weekend for Meta’s New AI Chatbot to Become Racist.” Yes, smart software seems to be adept at learning racism. That is why some companies have put strict guardrails on how the public can interact with their budding algorithms. Meta, however, recently threw BlenderBot 3 onto the internet specifically to interact with and learn from anyone who wished to converse with it. Then there is the bias that usually comes from datasets used to train machine learning software. The open internet is probably the worse source to use, yet this is exactly where Meta sends its impressionable bot for answers to user questions. Reporter Christianna Silva tells us:
“Meta’s BlenderBot 3 can search the internet to talk with humans about nearly anything, unlike past versions of the chatbot. It can do that all while leaning on the abilities provided by previous versions of the BlenderBot, like personality, empathy, knowledge, and the ability to have long-term memory pertaining to conversations it’s had. Chatbots learn how to interact by talking with the public, so Meta is encouraging adults to talk with the bot in order to help it learn to have natural conversations about a wide range of topics. But that means the chatbot can also learn misinformation from the public, too. According to Bloomberg, it described Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg as ‘too creepy and manipulative’ in conversation with a reporter from Insider. It told a Wall Street Journal reporter that Trump ‘will always be’ president and touted the anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that it was ‘not implausible’ that Jewish people control the economy.”
The write-up reminds us of a couple other AIs that caused controversy with racist and sexist perspectives, Google’s LaMDA and Microsoft’s Tay. Will scientists ever find a way to train an algorithm free from such human foibles? Perhaps one day—after we have managed to eliminate them in ourselves. I wouldn’t hold my breath.
Cynthia Murrell, September 1, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
