Blue Chip Consulting: An Interesting Question with a Painfully Obvious Answer
November 30, 2022
I read “Why Is Booz Allen Renting Us Back Our Own National Parks?” The author is asking a BIG question with what may be a tiny answer.
The essay states:
Today I’m writing about how the giant government contracting firm Booz Allen and 13 government agencies have been renting back to the public access to our own lands by forcing us to pay junk fees to use national parks.
The essay runs through some historical information about land. Interesting, but I tuned that type of information when I had to take a class in US history as a freshman at the third-rate outfit which accepted me as a student. Sure, the professor became a US congress person and had influence. But the lectures about land, Henry Clay, and Manifest Destiny did not compute. (In 1962 I was trying to figure out how to get an IBM computer to accept a program to index Latin sermons. Land was a fungible, and I was and remain on the intangible side of life.)
A US government Web site becomes a point of reference in the essay. Now you may think that US government Web sites are no big deal. Rest assured that in preparing annual budgets, Web sites are indeed a big deal. Did you know that US national laboratories want traffic because click data let’s some labs say to a Congressional committee: “We are pulling in eyeballs because our research is Number One with a bullet.” Believe me. Some people’s jobs depend on getting an elected official to see Web traffic as germane to pulse weapon funding or more esoteric activities.
The Web site referenced is not involved in nuclear research information. Recreation.gov becomes a way for a government agency to demonstrate that it is [a] serving citizens, [b] demonstrating that it is operating as a business, not a service organization, and [c] in step with hip digital trends. The write up points out that my former employer Booz Allen does a great deal of business with the Federal sector. The write up points out that Booz Allen has been involved in interesting and often big dollar projects. Some of these projects are so-so; others not so so-so; and a number of them are home runs. Booz Allen is an organization of hitters, not sitters.
I noted this passage in the write up:
In 2017, Booz Allen got a 10-year $182 million contract to consolidate all booking for public lands and waters, with 13 separate agencies participating, from the Bureau of Land Management to the National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration to the National Park Service to the Smithsonian Institution to the Tennessee Valley Authority to the US Forest Service. The funding structure of the site is exactly what George Washington Plunkitt would design. Though there’s a ten year contract with significant financial outlays, Booz Allen says the project was built “at no cost to the federal government.” In the contractor’s words, “the unique contractual agreement is a transaction-based fee model that lets the government and Booz Allen share in risk, reward, results, and impact.” In other words, Booz Allen gets to keep the fees charged to users who want access to national parks. Part of the deal was that Booz Allen would get the right to negotiate fees to third party sites that want access to data on Federal lands.
Then the essay notes:
Yes, Booz Allen gets to steal some pennies, but we have a remarkable system of public lands and waters that are broadly available for all of us to use on a relatively equal basis. And we can still see the power of George-ism in the advocacy of hikers and in the intense view that members of Congress had when they passed the Federal Lands Recreation Enhancement Act in 2004, which strictly regulated fees that Americans would have to pay to access our Federal lands.
Then the essay includes a statement which baffles me:
We are in a moment of institutional corruption, but these moments are transitory as institutions change.
Now let’s answer the question, “Why is Booz Allen renting us back our own national parks?”
My answer is my personal opinion, and you may choose to disagree:
- Government professionals directly or indirectly created a statement of work designed to help a unit of a government agency meet its annual objectives; for instance, cost recovery so citizens benefit without the agency spending government money. Remember that Booz Allen gets paid to create a fee generation system which pays Booz Allen and makes users of Recreation.gov really happy. At the same time, the agency officials get credit for a job well done and possibly some power or money related benefit.
- Booz Allen (in its present form) was shaped in the mid 1970s specifically to capture government contracts of any type. The purpose of the capture is to generate fee based revenue from professional services and in some cases by creating a fungible thing like a cartridge ejection mechanism. The object is to bill in accordance with the tasks set forth in the statement of work and implement applicable scope changes in order to respond to the client agency’s needs.
- The projects — whether Recreation.gov, the structure of the US Department of Navy, or providing inputs to space warfare analysts — give the professionals working in US government agencies a wide range of interesting work tasks. These tasks include, but are not limited to, attending meetings, meeting with sub-contractors, coordinating with other government entities, and in the case of national park projects, a field trip, maybe many field trips.
Thus, the answer to the question is that Booz Allen does not rent back national parks. Booz Allen plus a small number other blue chip consulting firms create work for Federal employees and for those paid directly by Booz Allen. Think of Booz Allen as the engine room of the government machine.
The march through history, the precedents for land use, and the other History 121 topics are completely irrelevant to making an essentially unmanageable and functionally impaired national park system appear to work reasonably well.
I would ask the author of the essay: What would be a better method? Would it be possible to find an optimally performing government agency and transport those systems and methods to those entities involved in Recreation.gov? How about using the Internal Revenue Service as a model? What if one snags the Social Security Agency or Health and Human Services as a model? We can jump branches and emulate the Senate sergeant at arm’s management methods? Do any of these provide a model?
To answer these questions my thought is that some government agencies will hire either Booz Allen or a similar firm.
Why? Booz Allen can do work, give government professionals tasks to complete, and send invoices.
The BIG question has a small, simple answer. Plus one can reserve a space for vanlifers whose rides conform to the National Park guidelines. That’s a deliverable.
Stephen E Arnold, November 30, 2022
France and US Businesses: Semi Permanent Immiscibility?
November 30, 2022
Unlike a pendulum, the French government and two US high-technology poster kids don’t see eye to eye. However, governments, particularly those in France, are not impressed with the business practices of some US firms. The tried and true “Senator, thank you for the question” and assurances that the companies in questions are following the ethical precepts of respected French philosophers don’t work. “France Directs Schools to Stop Using Microsoft Office & Google Workspace” reports:
In a recent response to an interrogation by a Member of the Parliament, the French Minister of Education clarified that French schools should not use Microsoft 365 and Google Workspace. The reasons behind the Ministry’s position are twofold. First, the Ministry is concerned about the confidentiality and lawfulness of data transfers. Second, reliance on European providers is coherent with the government’s “cloud at the center” policy.
The write up explains that France’s view of privacy and the practices of Apple and Google are not in sync. Then there is the issue of the cloud and where data and information “are.” Given modern network and data center technology, the “there” is often quite tricky to pin down. Tricky is not a word the current French government feels comfortable using when talking about schools, teachers, students, and research conducted by French universities.
How will this play out? France will get its way. That’s why some chickens have labels which mean conformance. No label on that chicken, no deal.
Stephen E Arnold, November 30, 2022
Collusion? What Do You Mean Collusion?
November 30, 2022
Ah what wise and ethical firms we have at the top of the tech food chain. MacRumors reports, “Amazon and Apple ‘Colluded’ to Make iPhone and iPad More Expensive, Says Antitrust Lawsuit.” The complaint alleges the companies conspired to kick third-party vendors of Apple products from Amazon’s marketplace in order to escalate prices and keep them aloft. Did they think no one would notice? We learn:
“There were around 600 third-party sellers of Apple devices on Amazon Marketplace, which was whittled down to just seven. Amazon began eliminating third-party sellers after it signed a 2019 deal with Apple to limit the number of resellers on Amazon marketplace to 20 per country. In exchange, Apple provided Amazon with a discounted wholesale price for iPhones and iPads. By restricting third-party sellers from offering Apple products, Amazon made itself the dominant seller of Apple products on Amazon Marketplace, which Amazon and Apple both ‘stood to benefit from’ even though it ‘would harm the public.’ The lawsuit claims that prior to the agreement, third-party resellers were offering ‘prices steeply discounted’ from those Apple wanted to have for its online storefront, which resulted in lower prices for consumers.”
That does look bad. But wait, there is an important caveat:
“There is no word on specific devices that went up in price due to the agreement, and no explanation of whether sellers were offering older devices or current products, nor if these were refurbished devices.”
Those would be key distinctions. The write-up does not mention (though commenters have) that purveyors of stolen and counterfeit goods are known to operate through Amazon. Were any of them among the approximately 590 sellers axed? We may never know.
The suit requests an injunction forcing Amazon to allow third-party Apple sellers back on and to reimburse customers who it claims overpaid by as much as 20%. We are curious to see how this lawsuit plays out.
Cynthia Murrell, November 30, 2022
This Is Not About Message Bubbles. We Want Cash, Suggests Apple
November 30, 2022
Telegram is an encrypted message service that has avoided paying Apple fees, but according to TechRadar that has come to an end: “Telegram Forced To Crack Down On Paid Posts Because Apple Wasn’t Getting A Cut.”
Telegram used to allow users to set up paid content posts with third-party payment bots. This allowed content creators to avoid paying Apple’s fees and their fans paid them directly. Content creators received close to 100% of their fans’ donations without sending a chunk to Apple. Unfortunately, Apple wants its 30% and Telegram is forced to comply. If Telegram does not comply with Apple, then it will be removed from the App Store.
Apple has a monopoly in the app market and even other tech giants, like Elon Musk and Spotify, are saying 30% is too much. South Korea passed a law that allowed content creators to use third-party payment services other than Apple:
“You have the likes of Spotify calling the tech giant “anti-competitive” because of App Store rules that make buying an audiobook overly complicated. Newfound Twitter wrangler Elon Musk said back in May that 30 percent is “10 times higher than it should be” and South Korea thought so, too. Last year, the nation passed a law forcing Apple and Google to allow developers to use third-payment systems and not pay the hefty tax.”
Apple does not care that it charges 30%, because they have a monopoly and all its decisions are unilateral. That is what happens when they use an OS other than Windows.
Whitney Grace, November 30, 2022
Smart Software: Can Humans Keep Pace with Emergent Behavior ?
November 29, 2022
For the last six months, I have been poking around the idea that certain behaviors are emergent; that is, give humans a capability or a dataspace, and those humans will develop novel features and functions. The examples we have been exploring are related to methods used by bad actors to avoid take downs by law enforcement. The emergent behaviors we have noted exploit domain name registry mechanisms and clever software able to obfuscate traffic from Tor exit nodes. The result of the online dataspace is unanticipated emergent behaviors. The idea is that bad actors come up with something novel using the Internet’s furniture.
We noted “137 Emergent Abilities of Large Language Models.” If our understanding of this report is mostly accurate, large language models like those used by Google and other firms manifest emergent behavior. What’s interesting is that the write up explains that there is not one type of emergent behavior. The article ideas a Rivian truck bed full of emergent behaviors.
Here’s are the behaviors associated with big data sets and LaMDA 137B. (The method is a family of Transformer-based neural language models specialized for dialog. Correctly or incorrectly we associate LaMBA with Google’s smart software work. See this Google blog post.) Now here are the items mentioned in the Emergent Abilities paper:
Gender inclusive sentences German
Irony identification
Logical arguments
Repeat copy logic
Sports understanding
Swahili English proverbs
Word sorting
Word unscrambling
Another category of emergent behavior is what the paper calls “Emergent prompting strategies.” The idea is more general prompting strategies manifest themselves. The system can perform certain functions that cannot be implemented when using “small” data sets; for example, solving multi step math problems in less widely used languages.
The paper includes links so the different types of emergent behavior can be explored. The paper wraps up with questions researchers may want to consider. One question we found suggestive was:
What tasks are language models currently not able to to perform, that we should evaluate on future language models of better quality?
The notion of emergent behavior is important for two reasons: [a] Systems can manifest capabilities or possible behaviors not anticipated by developers and [b] Novel capabilities may create additional unforeseen capabilities or actions.
If one thinks about emergent behaviors in any smart, big data system, humans may struggle to understand, keep up, and manage downstream consequences in one or more dataspaces.
Stephen E Arnold, November 29, 2022
Harvard Expert Opines about Harvard Drop Out, the Zuckster
November 29, 2022
I read a weird news release or self promotional write up from an outfit called Benzinga. The write up is titled “Harvard Expert Says Zuckerberg Is Detailing Facebook: I Thing the Wealth Went to His Head.” Imitating the jazzy writing style of other zippy news entities, I noted what the publication calls “Zingers.” Here is the zinger that caught my attention:
Bill George said Zuckerberg is to blame for Facebook losing its market share to upstart rival TikTok.
I assume that Mr. George is an estimable Harvard-grade expert and former top dog of a medical technology outfit. The assessment of the Zuckster appears in Mr. George’s new book “True North: Leading Authentically in Today’s Workplace, Emerging Leader Edition.”
The write up adds:
Mark Zuckerberg’s leadership approach as the CEO of Meta Platforms Inc has not helped the company grow, and instead dragging it towards failure.
Let’s flip this analysis around. The Zuckster was at Harvard, possibly long enough to ingest its approach to life, business, social responsibility, ethics, and overall view of non-Harvard types.
If my assertion is correct, Facebook is a manifestation of Harvard. Think of Jeffrey Skilling (a Harvard whiz kid) and Enron. Is it possible that the pulse of Harvard keeps alive a certain zeitgeist?
If I am correct, the Zuckster is just doing what the Crimson do when given a chance; for example, assume control, reject inputs, and pay people to do his bidding.
Go Harvard!
Stephen E Arnold, November 29, 2022
Microsoft Fancy Dances When Activision Plays a Tune
November 29, 2022
In order to convince the European Commission it should be allowed to acquire Activision Blizzard, Microsoft is sampling some humble pie. Android Authority reports, “Microsoft Admits Xbox vs PlayStation War Is Over and It Lost.” Write Ryan McNeal tells us:
“The EU’s European Commission has announced in a press release that it has opened up an in-depth investigation into Microsoft’s proposed acquisition of Activision Blizzard. This investigation was activated after the proposed deadline EU regulators set back in September when the deal was first being looked into. According to the press release, the new inquiry now has 90 working days — until March 23, 2023 — to make a decision. The Commission claims that it is concerned Microsoft’s acquisition could upset the balance in the market, causing a reduction in competition.”
Specifically, the commission suspects Microsoft might make successful PlayStation games like “Call of Duty” into Xbox-only titles. Heavens no, the company insists, it promises to make games available on both platforms simultaneously. This is all about giving the people greater access to games, a representative asserts. And here we thought it was all about creating a distraction. McNeal continues:
“Since the first time it hit a snag with European regulators, Microsoft has attempted to utilize an underdog strategy to delegitimize Sony’s arguments against the deal. In response to today’s investigation announcement, Microsoft attempted to drive that talking point home by admitting that Sony is the market leader.”
Will this self-effacing logic work? We should find out by the end of March. Nota bene: Our team thinks that the push for Activision was possibly a way to deflect attention from some interesting Microsoft security issues. Games are big money, but the issue of Teams in Microsoft 365 may be an even more sensitive issue.
Cynthia Murrell, November 29, 2022
Why Did Smart People Fall For The FTX Scam? Uh, Maybe Greed?
November 29, 2022
When we hear how people fall for scams, we tell ourselves that we are too smart and will never become a victim of one. Despite our intelligence, we all become scam victims at some point in our lives. Hopefully, the aftermath is no more devastating than broken pride and a well-learned lesson. Unfortunately, investors in the FTX crypto currency have lost everything like people in the 1930s Depression. The Guardian expresses why FTX lured so many people: “Why Were So Many Smart People So Dumb About FTX? Did They Seriously Just Like Sam Bankman-Fried’s Vibe?”
Area Mahdawi wrote the editorial about crypto currencies and she immediately rips into Sam Bankman-Fried’s unprofessionalism. The FTX inventor played videogames during business meetings. That does not inspire confidence. Large investors threw money at him and he was described as the “next Warren Buffett” and it was believed he could become the world’s first trillionaire.
Behind the proverbial curtain, Bankman-Fried was pulling a typical scam: shifting funds from FTX to his other company, Alameda Research. He then made risky risky trades and lost billions! His net worth fell from $16.2 billion to $3. Bankman-Fried lived a luxurious life a lá Anna Delvey in the Bahamas with his nine employees and they all had various romantic relationships with each other.
Mahdawi thinks people fell for Bankman-Fried for two reasons:
- They didn’t understand what he was selling, so that meant he was a genius.
- They liked his charisma.
Some investors were impressed that Bankman-Fried played videogames during meetings. Why? Maybe he conveyed an autistic savant vibe that appeared he could crunch the numbers and do magic tricks. Mahdawi said this would not have happened to other people, especially women:
“I don’t know about you, but I’m having one of those want-to-tear-my-hair-out-with-frustration moments right now. Can you imagine a woman playing video games in a meeting and being handed billions by investors? That would never happen. Last year, female founders secured only 2% of venture capital in the US and I’ll bet you everything I have that those founders were as buttoned-up as you can get. I’ll bet you they didn’t get a billion dollars because people “just liked their vibe”.”
She’s right, but also wrong. It depends on the person handing out the loans and the office politics. As to why the people invested their money with the scam artist, they wanted to make more money. Chalk it up to simple greed. Greed is good too.
Whitey Grace, November 30, 2022
Europol Take Down Despite a Bad Actor Haven, Encryption, and Modern Business Methods
November 28, 2022
First, Europol and a group of investigators shut down a drug operation. “Operation Desert Light: Europol Take Down Massive Cocaine Super Cartel” reported:
…49 people were arrested across six European countries, the EU’s police agency, Europol, said.
The somewhat terse news story referenced a couple of factoids that I found interesting:
- The article mentioned that there were six senior criminals running the operation. This to me suggests what I call in my lectures to law enforcement and intelligence professionals “industrialized crime.” The idea is that the precepts and methods are ones widely used by successful businesses. Just as the ideas about engineering efficiency and MBA profit maximization have diffused in legitimate enterprises, bad actors have been good students and implementers.
- One bad actor fled Europe and operated from Dubai. Dubai has, for some including this particular bad actor, has become a destination of choice for some pursued by authorities representing other countries. What makes Dubai a possible safe haven? What additional steps are needed to reduce the appeal of Dubai and certain other countries?
- The article mentions “encrypted phones.” In my lectures, I discuss the Teflon effect of secure mobile devices and digital currencies which I describe as Bitcoin or variants.
Net net: More direct action by governments is necessary to [a] speed up investigations and [b] remove barriers to appropriate surveillance by direct and indirect methods. Crime is an emergent feature of online systems and services. To prevent criminal activity from becoming the dominant feature of online, a rethink of systems and methods may provide fruitful.
Just my opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, November 28, 2022
The Collision of Nation State Bias and High School Science Club Management
November 28, 2022
CNN offered some interesting pictures of the labor management misunderstanding in Zhengzhou, China. Even though I have been to China several times, I was not sure what made Zengzhou different from other “informed” cities struggling with what may be an ill-advised approach to Covid. In fact, the images of law enforcement and disgruntled individuals are not particularly unique. These images are more interesting when a blurry background of Apple and a Taiwanese company add a touch of chiaroscuro to the scenes.
What is interesting is that “Apple Has a Huge Problem with an iPhone Factory in China” mentions the “Taiwan contract manufacturing firm Foxconn.” CNN, however, does not offer any information about the involvement of individuals who want to create issues for Foxconn. China and Taiwan sort of coexist, but I am not certain that the Chinese provincial government either in Henan or the national government in Beijing are particularly concerned about what happens to either Apple of Foxconn.
The fact that workers suddenly became upset suggests that I have to exercise a willing suspension of disbelief and assume the dust up was spontaneous. Sorry, a “Hey, this just happened because of pay” or some similar dismissive comment won’t make me feel warm and fuzzy.
The write up asserts:
The Zhengzhou campus has been grappling with a Covid outbreak since mid-October that caused panic among its workers. Videos of people leaving Zhengzhou on foot went viral on Chinese social media in early November, forcing Foxconn to step up measures to get its staff back…. But on Tuesday [November 22, 2022] night, hundreds of workers, mostly new hires, began to protest against the terms of the payment packages offered to them and also about their living conditions. Scenes turned increasingly violent into the next day as workers clashed with a large number of security forces. By Wednesday [November 23] evening, the crowds had quieted, with protesters returning to their dormitories on the Foxconn campus after the company offered to pay the newly recruited workers 10,000 yuan ($1,400), or roughly two months of wages, to quit and leave the site altogether.
Seems straightforward. A confluence of issues culminated in a protest.
Now let’s think about the issue this way. These are my working hypotheses.
First, Foxconn may not perceive the complaints of its employees as important. Sure, the factory workers have to do their job, but these are Chinese factory workers. Foxconn has a Taiwan spin. This may translate into Chinese government passivity. Let the Taiwan managers deal with the problems.
Second, Apple is a US outfit and it embraces some of the tenets of the high school science club management method. The kernel of the HSSCMM is that science club members know best. Others do not; therefore, if something is not on the radar of the science club, that “something” is irrelevant, silly, or just plain annoying.
Third, the workers have some awareness of the financial resources of Foxconn and Apple. Thus, like workers from an Apple store to the quiet halls of the Apple core spaceship, money talks.
Fourth, Covid. Yep, not going away it seems.
What happens when China is not too interested in Foxconn, Foxconn is not too interested in Chinese workers, and Apple is busy inventing ways to prevent people from upgrading the Mac computers?
That’s what CNN understands. Protests, clashes, and violence. Toss in some Covid fear and one has the exciting story for consumers of CNN “real” news.
Is there are fix? For China and its attitude to Taiwanese businesses which allegedly exploit Chinese workers, sure. I won’t explore that solution. For Foxconn, sure, but it will take time for Foxconn to de-China its production operations. For Apple, not really. The company will follow the logic of the science club: Find some people who will work for less.
Net net: Apple and its HSSCMM will probably not find too many fans in the Middle Kingdom. And Foxconn? Do China and Apple care? Apple cares about money. China cares about the Middle Kingdom. Foxconn cares about what? Building plants in the US… soon?
Stephen E Arnold, November 28, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
