CNN Surfaces an Outstanding Quote from the Zuck

December 30, 2022

Tucked in “The Year That Brought Silicon Valley Back Down to Earth” was an outstanding quotation from the chief Meta professional, Mark (the Zucker) Zuckerberg. Here’s the quote:

“Unfortunately, this did not play out the way I expected.”

The CNN article revisits what are by now old tropes and saws.

When I spotted the title, I thought a handful of topics would be mentioned; for example:

  1. The medical testing fraud
  2. The crazy “value” of wild hair styles and digital currency, lawyer parents, and disappearing billions. Poof.
  3. Assorted security issues (Yes, I am thinking of Microsoft and poisoned open source libraries. Hey, isn’t GitHub part of the Softies’ empire?)
  4. Apple’s mystical interactions with China
  5. Taylor Swift’s impact on Congressional interest in online ticket excitement
  6. An annual update on Google’s progress in solving death
  7. Amazon’s interaction with trusted third party sellers (Yes, I am thinking of retail thefts)
  8. Tesla’s outer space thinking about self driving
  9. Palantir’s ads asserting that it is the leader in artificial intelligence.

None of these made the CNN story. However, that quote from the Zuck touches some of these fascinating 2022 developments.

Stephen E Arnold, December 30, 2022

Apple Think: Characteristics of Working in a Ring with Echoes

December 30, 2022

Have you been reminded to think in 360 degrees. The idea, as I recall, is to look at a problem, opportunity, or action from different angles. Instead of screwing up because a decider verifies a preconceived idea, the 360 method is supposed to avoid overlooking the obvious.

What about those Apple AirTags? Was 360 degree think in operation when the idea of finding a lost phone was hatched? In my opinion, an Apple AirTag is useful for many good news use cases. iPhone users will want several, maybe six, maybe a dozen. Just clip one on a key ring, and in theory one can locate those keys. Find your luggage. Keep an eye on the cat. The trick is to sign up for the assorted Apple services which make the AirTag function.

Many Apple employees work in a circular structure which looks like a hula hoop. Could the building be a concretization of the metaphor for 360 degree thinking? If so, I cannot understand why the AirTag application for stalking was not identified as a use case? What about tracking an expensive auto so a car thief can drive off after the owner leaves the vehicle at the mall? Could an assassin use the AirTag to verify the target was at a location without having to use other means to achieve the kind of future Mr. Putin envisions for Mr. Volodymyr Zelenskyy?

Did the Apple professionals doing 360 degree thinking in the circular building consider these applications of the AirTag? My hunch is that Apple does Ring Think. It makes money, but the unforeseen consequences appear to be mere downstream details.

What about iPhone’s ability to detect a user who is in a car crash. The idea is that an accident is detected by the iPhone. Authorities are notified. Help is dispatched. Perfect. Has something been overlooked by Ring Think via the 360 degree analysis.

You decide.

Apple Watch and iPhone Crash Detection Software an Issue for Search and Rescue Crews” reports:

One of the new features on the iPhone and Apple Watch is crash detection. It is designed to detect car crashes and if needed, alert the local authorities.

Perfect. Car crash. Alert authorities. What did the Apple wizards overlook? Here’s a quote from the write up:

“It’s quite sophisticated,” Dwight Yochim, a senior manager with the B.C. Search and Rescue Association told Global News. “It [the crash detection in an iPhone] recognizes a sudden change in speed, sound of crunching metal and glass and even the airbag deploying. But for whatever reason, people in the backcountry and maybe it’s just our B.C. backcountry enthusiasts, they’re just hardcore, and the falling and the kind of crashing through the woods literally is setting it off.”

Apple allegedly has issued software to help address the accidental alert. These unintentional, accidental alerts have consequences. The write up reports that Mr. Yochim said:

“We do 2,000 calls a year now. And we did a report a couple of years ago that showed that we’re probably going to hit 3,000 in about 10 years. So the more of these false calls we have, the more time it takes away from our members,” Yochim said. “They’re putting in 400,000 hours now in training, administration and incidents. And so every one of these calls is four or five hours for a dozen people to respond. Then you find out there’s some puzzled subject at the end going, ‘I didn’t even realize I activated it’.”

I am not all that interested in AirTags and automatic alerts. The issue is that these are two specific examples of functionality that has a number of applications. Some good and some bad.

However, what less visible, more subtle examples of failed 360 analysis and Ring Think are in the Apple ecosystem? What if some of the flubs and ignored applications have far greater consequences. Instead of knowing a human trafficker will target an individual for abduction, the latent use case is invisible and will emerge without warning?

What’s the responsibility of a company which relies on Ring Think to minimize the impact of their innovations?

Here’s a thought for the New Year: There is no remediation. Society has to live with technical activities. Therefore, why should an Apple type of organization leave its spaceship shaped structure and worry about a kidnapped child?

Why bother? Or, it’s not our problem because we are only human. And, my fave, we’re not able to predict the future. But the big reason is look at the good our work does.

Yep, I got it.

Stephen E Arnold, December 30, 2022

Apple Signals and Messages Telegram Its Intentions

December 30, 2022

Apple is losing its touch. Once the outfit was a religion with chips. Now it is a subscription machine with no right to repair.

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. Will Apple compete with Telegram to capture more encrypted messaging traffic?

Absolutely.

Whitney Grace, December 30, 2022

Identity Theft Made Easy: Why?

December 30, 2022

Some automobiles are lemons aka money holes, because they have defects that keep breaking. Many services are like that as well, including rental car insurance, extended warranties on electronics, and identity theft protection. Life Hacker explains why identity theft protection services are a scam in the story: “Identity Theft Protection Is Mostly Bullshit.”

Most Americans receive emails or physical letters from their place of work, medical offices, insurance agencies, etc. that their personal information was involved in a data breach. As a token of atonement, victims are given free Identity Theft Protection (ITP) aka a useless service. These services promise to monitor the Internet and Dark Web for your personal information. This includes anything from your credit cards to social security number. Identity theft victims deal with ruined credit scores and possibly stolen funds. Identity Theft Protection services seem to be a good idea, until you realize that you can do the monitoring yourself for free.

ITP services monitor credit reports, social media accounts, the Dark Web, and personal financial accounts. Some of these services such as credit reports and your financial accounts will alert you when there is suspicious activity. You can do the following for free:

“You can access your credit reports for free once a year. And you should! It’s a fast and pretty straightforward operation, and at a glance you can see if someone has opened a credit card or taken out a loan in your name. In fact, the number one best way to stop folks from stealing your identity is to freeze your credit, which prevents anyone—even if they have your personal information—from getting a new credit card or loan. While this doesn’t protect you from every single kind of fraud out there, it removes the most common vectors that identity thieves use.”

The US government also maintains a Web site to assist identity theft victims. It is wise to remember that ITP services are different from identity theft insurance. The latter is the same as regular insurance, except it is meant to help when your information is stolen.

Practice good identity hygiene by monitoring your accounts and not posting too much personal information online.

Why is identity theft like a chicken wing left on a picnic table? Careless human or indifferent maintenance worker?

Whitney Grace, December 30, 2022

Need a Human for Special Work? Just Buy One Maybe?

December 29, 2022

Is it possible to purchase a person? Judging from the rumors I have heard in rural Romania, outside the airport in Khartoum, and in a tavern in Tirana — I would suggest that the answer is “possibly.” The Times of London is not into possibilities if the information in “Maids Trafficked and Sold to Wealthy Saudis on Black Market” is accurate. Keep in mind that I am mindful of what I call open source information blindspots. Shaped, faked, and weaponized information is now rampant.

The article focuses on an ecommerce site called Haraj.sa. The article explains:

[The site] Saudi Arabia’s largest online marketplace, through which a Times investigation shows that hundreds of domestic workers are being illegally trafficked and sold to the highest bidders.

Furthermore, the Times adds:

The app, which had 2.5 million visits last year — more than Amazon or AliExpress within the kingdom — is still available on the Apple and Google Play stores despite being criticised by the UN’s Special Rapporteurs in 2020 for facilitating modern slavery.

If true, the article is likely to make for some uncomfortable days as the world swings into 2023; specifically:

  1. The Saudi government
  2. Apple
  3. Google
  4. Assorted law enforcement professionals.

If the information in the write up is accurate, several of the newspaper’s solicitors will be engaged in conversations with other parties’ solicitors. I assume that there will be some conversations in Mayfair and Riyadh about the article. Will Interpol become curious? Probably.

Let’s step back and ask some different questions. I am assuming that some of the information in the article is “correct”; that is, one can verify screenshots or chase down the source of the information. Maybe the lead journalist will consent to an interview on a true crime podcast. Whatever.

Consider these questions:

  1. Why release the story at the peak of some countries’ holiday season? Is the timing designed to minimize or emphasize the sensitive topic of alleged slavery, the Kingdom’s conventions, or the apparent slipshod app review process at controversial US high technology companies?
  2. What exactly did or does Apple and Google know about the app for the Haraj marketplace? If the Times’ story is accurate, what management issue exists at each of these large, but essential to some, companies?
  3. Is the ecommerce site operating within the Kingdom’s cultural norms or is the site itself breaking outside legal guidelines? What does Saudi Arabia say about this site?

To sum up, human trafficking is a concern for many individuals, government entities, and non-governmental organizations. I keep coming back to the question “Why now?” The article states:

Apple said: “We strictly prohibit the solicitation or promotion of illegal behaviour, including human trafficking and child exploitation, in the App Store and across every part of our business. We take any accusations or claims around this behaviour very seriously.” Google declined to comment. Haraj, Saudi Arabia’s human rights commission and the government have been contacted for a response.

Perhaps taking more time to obtain comments would have been useful? What’s the political backstory for the disclosure of the allegedly accurate information during the holiday season? Note that the story is behind a paywall which further limits its diffusion.

Net net: Many questions have I.

Stephen E Arnold, December 29, 2022

Are Facebook and Google Monopolies: Nope, Shrinking Share of Online Ads. Proof!

December 29, 2022

I read an interesting article, but I have my doubts about the numbers. The story is from one of the “last person standing” in the Silicon Valley real news datasphere. In the last month or so, the tone of write ups about two of America’s most lovable and well managed companies has turned south, well, maybe south by southwest.

Share of US Digital Ad Spend, by Company Type” reports:

Google and Meta will together capture 48.4% of all U.S. digital ad revenue this year (28.8% for Google and 19.6% for Meta), down from 54.7% at their peak in 2017 (34.7% for Google and 20.0% for Meta), per data from Insider Intelligence.

And what about the lovable Bezos bulldozer driven pedal to the metal by Andy Jassy? The article states:

  • By far, the biggest threat to their collective ad dominance is Amazon, which has grown its ad business to over $30 billion dollars annually.
  • By 2024, Amazon is expected to capture 12.7% of all U.S. digital ad dollars, while Meta is expected to capture 17.9%.

TikTok is no big whoop. I suppose that’s why the tech giants are becoming pretzels in their effort create short form content.

Several observations:

  1. I am not sure how these data were gathered nor the methods used to present such remarkable precision as 54.7 percent in a prediction is an indication that someone did not pay attention in Statistics 101
  2. Amazon’s ad data are more interesting when the slope between the firm’s ad revenue in 2018 is plotted against Amazon’s ad revenue in 2021. That a slope!
  3. Blowing off TikTok is problematic. Does the data consider influencers who accept some type of compensation in return for merchandise, trips, or some other fungible asset like a super duper hair curling device?

To sum up: I am not prepared to label those wonderful wizards at Facebook and Google as crew on a doomed steamship named MY Failure.

Stephen E Arnold, December 2022

Loving Tablets and Chromebooks: Sure, Like Going to the Dentist

December 29, 2022

Might smartphones make some devices irrelevant? We learn from The Register that “Tablet, Chromebook Shipments Come Crashing Down.” The article examines IDC’s report of third-quarter shipments. It states a mere 38.6 million tablets were shipped between July 01 and September 30, a decline of almost 9% since the previous year. Only Huawei grew its sales as demand escalated in China and Russia, where sanctions barred the way for Western tech. Writer Paul Kunert reports:

“Apple saw sales decline 1.1 percent to 14.5 million, according to IDC estimates. Samsung was down 4 percent to 7.1 million, Amazon fell 8.1 percent to 4.3 million, Lenovo shipments dropped 36.6 percent to 2.7 million, and Huawei grew 2 percent to 2.4 million. In its results filed late last week, Apple said iPad sales to end users were up 21 percent to $8.3 billion in Q4 of its fiscal ’22 ended 30 September despite supply constraints. IDC tracks sales into the channel, hence the difference in the figures. Chromebook shipments fell at a far faster rate, down 34.4 percent year-on-year to 4.3 million devices. This was the fifth straight decline for this sector of the PC industry. The downward trajectory began in the US, which accounted for 70 percent of global shipments. … IDC placed Acer as market leader with shipments of 1 million, albeit down 23.8 percent on a year ago. Dell shrank 19.9 percent to 900,000 units, HP was down 26.8 percent to 800,000, Lenovo plunged 54.8 percent to 700,000, and Samsung was down 37 percent to 300,000.”

Researchers point out Chromebook sales spiked during the pandemic as students connected from home, so its decline is simply a return to normal levels. As for the rest, a tough economy was likely at play. Apparently one can endure a slightly smaller small screen when fuel and groceries are difficult to afford.

The Arnold IT team has a different set of conclusions:

  1. Tablets and Chromebooks are like wearing clothing two sizes to small. Think discomfort.
  2. The promoters of tablets and Chromebooks are likely to use laptops to do “real” work.
  3. Tablets and Chromebooks make routine tasks difficult; for example, keeping an Internet connection in Buenos Aires during the World Cup Parade and finding a dongle in Hermanus.

Money and power allow some outfits to sell unusual stuff. Why not advertise these products on cable at 3 am?

Cynthia Murrell, December 29, 2022

How Regulation Works: Irritate Taylor Swift and Find Out

December 29, 2022

Ticketmaster and its parent company Live Nation have been scamming consumers for decades. There was a lawsuit in the 2010s about inflated service fees that Ticketmaster lost. Plaintiffs were awarded gift certificates with minuscule amounts that could not be combined and had expiration dates. The bigger question, Engadget asks, is why did it take a poster to force the federal government into action: “Ticketmaster’s Taylor Swift Fiasco Sparks Senate Antitrust Hearing.”

Ticketmaster screwed up tickets for Taylor Swift’s first tour in five years. The ticket seller’s systems were overwhelmed by fourteen million people, including bots, when tickers went up for sale. Ticketmaster’s Web site was hit with 3.5 million system requests.

Ticketmaster informed Swift they could handle the mass of fans, but she was “pissed off” when they failed.

“Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Mike Lee (R-UT), the chair and ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Competition Policy, Antitrust and Consumer Rights, have announced a hearing to gather evidence on competition in the ticketing industry. They have yet to confirm when the hearing will take place or the witnesses that the committee will call upon.”

New York Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez stated Live Nation should be broken up. The US government has been investigating Live Nation’s monopoly for several months, but the Swift fiasco has garnered the issue more public attention.

Ticketmaster was sued in the past for similar issues and the company lost. Why is Live Nation allowed to continue its poor business practices?

Whitney Grace, December 29, 2022

Cyber Security: Is It Time for a Brazen Bull?

December 28, 2022

The cyber security industry has weathered Covid, mergers, acquisitions, system failures, and — excuse the lousy pun — solar winds. The flow of exploits with increasingly poetic names continues; for example, Azov, Zerobot, Killnet, etc. However, the cyber defense systems suffer from what one might call a slight misalignment. Bad actors find ways to compromise [a] humans to get user names and passwords, [b] exploit what is now the industry standard for excellence (MVP or minimal viable product, good enough engineering, and close-enough-for-horseshows technology), any gizmo or process connected to something connected to a public-facing network. The list of “bad” actors is a lengthy one. It includes bird-owning individuals in the UK, assorted government agencies hostile to the US, students in computer science class or hanging out in a coffee shop, and double agents with computing know how.

To add to the pain of cyber security, there are organizations which do great marketing but less great systems. “What’s in a PR Statement: LastPass Breach Explained” discusses a serious problem which underscores a number of issues.

LastPass is a product with a past reaching backwards more than a decade. The software made it easier for a user to keep track of what user name and password was whipped up to log into an online service or software. Over the years, PC Magazine found the password manager excellent. (Software can be excellent? Who knew?) Wikipedia has a list of “issues” the security software faced over the years. You can find that information here. More amusing is security expert Steve Gibson’s positive review of LastPass. Should you have the time, you can read about that expert’s conclusions in 2010 here.

But what does the PR statement article say? Here are a couple of snippets from the cited December 26, 2022, essay:

Snippet 1: Right before the holiday season, LastPass published an update on their breach. As people have speculated, this timing was likely not coincidental but rather intentional to keep the news coverage low. …Their statement is also full of omissions, half-truths and outright lies.

Harsh.

Snippet 2: Again, it seems that LastPass attempts to minimize the risk of litigation (hence alerting businesses) while also trying to prevent a public outcry (so not notifying the general public). Priorities…

My take on LastPass is that the company is doing what other cyber security firms do: Manage information about problems.

Let’s talk about cyber security on a larger stage. How does a global scale sound?

First, security is defined by [a] what bad actors have been discovered to do and [b] marketing. A breach occurs. A fix — ideally one enabled by artificial intelligence and chock full of predictive analytics — is created and marketed. Does the fix work? How about those Exchange Server exploits or those 24×7 phishing attacks? The point for me is that cyber security seems to be reactive; that is, dictated by what bad actors do.

Second, the “fix” is verified by whom and what? In the US there are Federal cyber groups. There are state cyber groups. There are cyber associations. There are specialty labs in fun places like Quantico. For a LastPass incident, which cowpoke moves the cow along? The point: Bureaucracy, friction, artificial barriers, time, expertise, money, and more.

Third, technical layoffs and time mean that cyber crime may be an attractive business opportunity for some.

Considering these three points, I want to hazard several observations:

  1. Cyber security may be an oxymoron
  2. Bad actors have the advantages granted by good enough software and systems, tools, talent, and time
  3. Users and customers who purchase security may be faced with a continual flow of surprises

What’s the fix? May I suggest that we consider bringing back the Bull of Phalaris aka the brazen bull.

The “bull” is fabricated of a suitable metal; for example, bronze. The inside of the bull is hollow. A trapdoor allows access to the interior space. When the trapdoor is closed, there is an opening from the interior to the bull’s nose. The malefactor — let’s say a venture firm’s managing director who is rolling up cyber security companies with flawed software — is placed inside the bull. A fire is built beneath the bull and the shouts and possible other noises are emitted from the opening in the bull’s head.

The use of the brazen bull for software developers pumping out “good enough” cyber security solutions can be an option as well. Once law enforcement snags the head of a notorious hacking gang, the bull will be pressed into duty. Keep in mind that Microsoft blamed 1,000 cyber warriors working in a country hostile to the US for the SolarWinds’ misstep. This would necessitate more bulls which would provide meaningful work to some.

I would advocate that marketer types who sell cyber security systems which don’t work be included in the list of individuals who can experience the thrill of the brazen bull.

My thought is that the use of the brazen bull with clips released as short videos would capture some attention.

What’s is going on now is not getting through? More robust measures are necessary. No bull.

Stephen E Arnold, December 28, 2022

Surprise: TikTok Reveals Its Employees Can View European User Data

December 28, 2022

What a surprise. The Tech Times reports, “TikTok Says Chinese Employees Can Access Data from European Users.” This includes workers not just within China, but also in Brazil, Canada, Israel, Japan, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, South Korea, and the United States. According to The Guardian, TikTok revealed the detail in an update to its privacy policy. We are to believe it is all in the interest of improving the users’ experience. Writer Joseph Henry states:

“According to ByteDance, TikTok’s parent firm, accessing the user data can help in improving the algorithm performance on the platform. This would mean that it could help the app to detect bots and malicious accounts. Additionally, this could also give recommendations for content that users want to consume online. Back in July, Shou Zi Chew, a TikTok chief executive clarified via a letter that the data being accessed by foreign staff is a ‘narrow set of non-sensitive’ user data. In short, if the TikTok security team in the US gives a green light for data access, then there’s no problem viewing the data coming from American users. Chew added that the Chinese government officials do not have access to these data so it won’t be a big deal to every consumer.”

Sure they don’t. Despite assurances, some are skeptical. For example, we learn:

“US FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr told Reuters that TikTok should be immediately banned in the US. He added that he was suspicious as to how ByteDance handles all of the US-based data on the app.”

Now just why might he doubt ByteDance’s sincerity? What about consequences? As some Sillycon Valley experts say, “No big deal. Move on.” Dismissive naïveté is helpful, even charming.

Cynthia Murrell, December 28, 2022

Next Page »

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta