But What about the Flip Side of Smart Software Swaying Opinion
September 20, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
The Silicon Valley “fight of the century” might be back on. I think I heard, “Let’s scrap” buzzing in the background when I read “Musk Has Turned Twitter into Hyper-Partisan Hobby Horse, Says Nick Clegg.” Here in Harrod’s Creek, Kentucky, them is fightin’ words. When they are delivered by a British luminary educated at Westminster School before going on to study at the University of Cambridge, the pronouncement is particularly grating on certain sensitive technology super heroes.
The Silicon Valley Scrap is ramping up. One one digital horse is the Zuck. On the other steed is Musk. When the two titans collide, who will emerge as the victor? How about the PR and marketing professionals working for each of the possible chevaliers? Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Good enough.
The write up in the Telegraph (a British newspaper which uses a paywall to discourage the riff raff from reading its objective “real news” stories reports:
Sir Nick, who is now head of global affairs for Facebook-owner Meta, said Mr Musk’s platform, which is now known as X, was used by a tiny group of elite people to “yell at each other” about politics. By contrast, Facebook and Instagram had deprioritized news and politics because people did not want to read it, he said.
Of course, Cambridge University graduates who have studied at the home of the Golden Gophers and the (where is it again?) College of Europe would not “yell.” How plebeian! How nouveau riche! My, my, how déclassé.
The Telegraph reports without a hint of sarcasm:
Meta launched a rival service last year called Threads, but has said it will promote subjects such as sports above news and politics in feeds. Sir Nick, who will next week face a Senate committee about tech companies’ role in elections, said that social media has very little impact on voters’ choices. “People tend to somewhat exaggerate the role that technology plays in how people vote and political behavior,” he said.
As a graduate of a loser school, I wish to humbly direct Sir Richard’s attention to “AI Chatbots Might Be Better at Swaying Conspiracy Theorists Than Humans.” The main idea of the write up of a research project is that:
Experiments in which an AI chatbot engaged in conversations with people who believed at least one conspiracy theory showed that the interaction significantly reduced the strength of those beliefs, even two months later. The secret to its success: the chatbot, with its access to vast amounts of information across an enormous range of topics, could precisely tailor its counterarguments to each individual.
Keeping in mind that I am not the type of person the University of Europe or Golden Gopher U. wants on its campus, I would ask, “Wouldn’t smart software work to increase the power of bad actors or company owners who use AI chatbots to hold opinions promoted by the high-technology companies. If so, Mr. Clegg’s description of X.com as a hobby horse would apply to Sir Richard’s boss, Mark Zuckerberg (aka the Zuck). Surely social media and smart software are able to slice, dice, chop, and cut in multiple directions. Wouldn’t a filter tweaked a certain way provide a powerful tool to define “reality” and cause some users to ramp up their interest in a topic? Could these platforms with a digital finger on the filter controls make some people roll over, pat their tummies, and believe something that the high technology “leadership” wants?
Which of these outstanding, ethical high-technology social media platforms will win a dust up in Silicon Valley? How much will Ticketmaster charge for a ring-side seat? What other pronouncements will the court jesters for these two highly-regarded companies say?
Stephen E Arnold, September 20, 2024
YouTube Is Bringing More AI To Its Platform
September 20, 2024
AI-generated videos have already swarmed on YouTube. These videos range from fake Disney movie trailers to inappropriate content that missed being flagged. YouTube creators are already upset that their videos are being overlooked by the algorithm, but some are being hired for an AI project. Digital Trends explains more: “More AI May Be Coming To YouTube In A Big Way.”
Gemini AI is currently in beta testing across YouTube. Gemini AI is described as a tool for YouTubers to brainstorm video ideas, including titles, topics, and thumbnails. Only a select few YouTubers are testing Gemini AI and will share their feedback. The AI tool will eventually be located underneath the platform’s analytic menu, under the research tab. The tool could actually be helpful:
“This marks Google’s second foray into including AI assistance in YouTube users’ creative processes. In May, the company launched a content inspiration tool on YouTube Studio that provides tips and suggestions for future clip topics based on viewer trends. For most any given topic, the AI will highlight related videos you’ve already published, provide tips on themes to use, and generate a script outline for you to follow.”
The YouTubers are experimenting with both Gemini AI and the content inspiration tool. They’re doing A/B testing and their experiences will shape how AI is used on the video platform. YouTube does acknowledge that AI is a transformative creative tool, but viewers want to know if what they’re watching is real or fake. Is anyone imagining a AI warning or rating system?
Whitney Grace, September 20, 2024
Intellexa: Ill Intent or Israeli Marketing Failure?
September 19, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
Most online experts are not familiar with the specialized software sector. Most of the companies in this intelware niche try to maintain a low profile. Publicity in general media, trade magazines, or TikTok is not desired. However, a couple of Israel-anchored vendors have embraced the Madison Avenue way. Indications of unwanted publicity surface in sources rarely given much attention by the poohbahs who follow more clickable topics like Mr. Musk’s getting into doo doo in Brazil or Mr. Zuck’s antics in Australia and the UK.
You know your marketing and PR firm has created an issue which allows management to ask, “Should we switch to a new marketing and PR firm?” Will the executives make a switch or go for a crisis management outfit instead? Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Interesting omission of the word “a”, but that’s okay. Your team is working on security and a couple of other pressing issues. Grammar is the least of some Softies’ worries.
The Malta Times (yep, it is an island with an interesting history and a number of business districts which house agents and lawyers who do fascinating work) reported on March 6, 2024, that:
The Maltese government has initiated the process of the deprivation of the Maltese citizenship of a person who appeared on a US sanctions list on Tuesday (March 5, 2024).
The individual, according to the write up, was “Ex-Israeli intelligence officer and current CEO of cyber spyware firm Intellexa.” The write up points out:
Tal Dilian was added to the United States Office of Foreign Assets Control Specially Designated Nationals List on Tuesday (March 5, 2024) in connection with sanctions by the US Treasury on members of the Intellexa Spyware Consortium.
The Malta Times noted:
According to the [U.S.] State Department, “Dilian is the founder of the Intellexa Consortium and is the architect behind its spyware tools. The consortium is a complex international web of decentralized companies controlled either fully or partially by Dilian, including through Sara Aleksandra Fayssal Hamou. “Hamou is a corporate off-shoring specialist who has provided managerial services to the Intellexa Consortium, including renting office space in Greece on behalf of Intellexa S.A. Hamou holds a leadership role at Intellexa S.A., Intellexa Limited, and Thalestris Limited,” said the State Department.
I saw a news release from the US Department of the Treasury titled “Treasury Sanctions Enablers of the Intellexa Commercial Spyware Consortium.” That statement said:
Today, the Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned five individuals and one entity associated with the Intellexa Consortium for their role in developing, operating, and distributing commercial spyware technology that presents a significant threat to the national security of the United States. These designations complement concerted U.S. government actions against commercial spyware vendors, including previous sanctions against individuals and entities associated with the Intellexa Consortium; the Department of Commerce’s addition of commercial spyware vendors to the Entity List; and the Department of State’s visa ban policy targeting those who misuse or profit from the misuse of commercial spyware, subsequently exercised on thirteen individuals.
Some of these people include:
- Felix Bitzios (Bitzios), beneficial owner of an Intellexa Consortium
- Andrea Nicola Constantino Hermes Gambazzi, the beneficial owner of Thalestris Limited which holds distribution rights to the Predator spyware and has been involved in processing transactions on behalf of other entities within the Intellexa Consortium.
- Merom Harpaz, a manager of Intellexa S.A.
- Panagiota Karaoli, the director of multiple Intellexa Consortium entities that are controlled by or are a subsidiary of Thalestris Limited.
- Artemis Artemiou (Artemiou), the general manager and member of the board of Cytrox Holdings Zartkoruen Mukodo Reszvenytarsasag (Cytrox Holdings), a member of the Intellexa Consortium
- Aliada Group Inc, a British Virgin Islands-based company and member of the Intellexa Consortium
Chatter about Intellexa’s specialized software has been making noise since
In 2021, the firm used this headline on its Web site to catch attention, not of law enforcement and intelligence agencies, but other entities:
More than intelligence gathering networks — Intellexa’s innovative insight platform
And statements like
Create insights, win the digital race
The lingo is important because it is marketing oriented. Plus, in 2021, the firm’s positioning emphasized Tal Dilian’s technology. (Some of the features reminded me of NSO Group’s Pegasus with a dash of other Israeli-developed specialized software systems.
How has the marketing worked out? Since Mr. Dilian became involved with a failing specialized software developer called Cytrox in Cyprus, Intellexa matured into an “alliance.” The reinvigorated outfit operated from Athens, Greece. By 2021, Intellexa was attracting attention from several governments related to officials’ whose devices had been enhanced with the cleverly named Predator software.
That marketing expertise has put Intellexa and its “affiliates” in the spotlight. From a PR point of view, mission accomplished. The problem appears to be that one PR and marketing success has created a sticky wicket for the company. An unintended consequence is that the specialized software vendors find themselves becoming increasingly well known. From my point of view, the failure to keep certain specialized software capabilities secret has been a surprising trend.
My hypothesis is that because the systems and methods for obtaining information for legal purposes has become more widely known, more people are thinking about how they too could obtain information from an entity. One may criticize what government entities do, but these entities (in theory) are operating within a formal structure. Use of specialized software, therefore, operates within a structure which has rules, regulations, norms for conduct, and similar knobs and dials. When the capabilities are available to anyone via a Telegram download, certain types of risk go up. That’s why I am not in favor of specialized software companies practicing the Israel developed NSO Group and Intellexa style of marketing.
But the mobile surveillance cat is out of the bag. And I have been around long enough to know what happens when cats are turned loose. They market, make noise, and make more cats. And some technology can make a mobile device behave in unexpected ways or go bang.
Stephen E Arnold, September 19, 2024
Happy AI News: Job Losses? Nope, Not a Thing
September 19, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb humanoid. No smart software required.
I read “AI May Not Steal Many Jobs after All. It May Just Make Workers More Efficient.” Immediately two points jumped out at me. The AP (the publisher of the “real” news story is hedging with the weasel word “may” and the hedgy phrase “after all.” Why is this important? The “real” news industry is interested in smart software to reduce costs and generate more “real” news more quickly. The days with “real” reporters disappearing for hours to confirm with a source are often associated with fiddling around. The costs of doing anything without a gusher of money pumping 24×7 are daunting. The word “efficient” sits in the headline as a digital harridan stakeholder. Who wants that?
The manager of a global news operation reports that under his watch, he has achieved peak efficiency. Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Will this work for production software development? Good enough is the new benchmark, right?
The story itself strikes me as a bit of content marketing which says, “Hey, everyone can use AI to become more efficient.” The subtext is, “Hey, don’t worry. No software robot or agentic thingy will reduce staff. Probably.
The AP is a litigious outfit even though I worked at a newspaper which “participated” in the business process of the entity. Here’s one sentence from the “real” news write up:
Instead, the technology might turn out to be more like breakthroughs of the past — the steam engine, electricity, the internet: That is, eliminate some jobs while creating others. And probably making workers more productive in general, to the eventual benefit of themselves, their employers and the economy.
Yep, just like the steam engine and the Internet.
When technologies emerge, most go away or become componentized or dematerialized. When one of those hot technologies fail to produce revenues, quite predictable outcomes result. Executives get fired. VC firms do fancy dancing. IRS professionals squint at tax returns.
So far AI has been a “big guys win sort of because they have bundles of cash” and “little outfits lose control of their costs”. Here’s my take:
- Human-generated news is expensive and if smart software can do a good enough job, that software will be deployed. The test will be real time. If the software fails, the company may sell itself, pivot, or run a garage sale.
- When “good enough” is the benchmark, staff will be replaced with smart software. Some of the whiz kids in AI like the buzzword “agentic.” Okay, agentic systems will replace humans with good enough smart software. That will happen. Excellence is not the goal. Money saving is.
- Over time, the ideas of the current transformer-based AI systems will be enriched by other numerical procedures and maybe— just maybe — some novel methods will provide “smart software” with more capabilities. Right now, most smart software just finds a path through already-known information. No output is new, just close to what the system’s math concludes is on point. Right now, the next generation of smart software seems to be in the future. How far? It’s anyone’s guess.
My hunch is that Amazon Audible will suggest that humans will not lose their jobs. However, the company is allegedly going to replace human voices with “audibles” generated by smart software. (For more about this displacement of humans, check out the Bloomberg story.)
Net net: The “real” news story prepares the field for planting writing software in an organization. It says, “Customer will benefit and produce more jobs.” Great assertions. I think AI will be disruptive and in unpredictable ways. Why not come out and say, “If the agentic software is good enough, we will fire people”? Answer: Being upfront is not something those who are not dinobabies do.
Stephen E Arnold, September 19, 2024
IT Departments Losing Support From Top Brass
September 19, 2024
Modern businesses can’t exist today without technological infrastructure. Organizations rely on the IT department. Without the Internet, computer, and other technology businesses come to a screeching halt. Despite the power IT departments wield, ZDNet says that, “Business Leaders Are Losing Faith In IT, According To This IBM Study. Here’s Why.” According to the survey, ten years ago business leaders believed that basic IT services were effect. Now it is only about half of what it used to be. Generative AI is also giving leaders the willies.
Business leaders are disgruntled with IT and they have high expectations over what technology shoulder deliver. Leaders want there technology to give their businesses a competitive edge. They’re also more technology competent than their predecessors, so the leaders want instantaneous fixes and results.
A big problem is that the leaders and tech departments aren’t communicating and collaborating. Generative AI is making both parties worry, because one doesn’t know what the other is doing concerning implementation and how to use it. It’s important for these groups to start talking, because AI and hybrid cloud services are expected to consume 50% more of infrastructure budgets.
The survey shared suggestions to improve confidence in IT services. Among the usual suggestions were hire more women who are IT or AI experts, make legacy systems AI ready by making infrastructure investments, use AI to build better AI, involve the workforce in how AI drives the business, and then these:
“Measure, measure, measure technology’s impact on business outcomes: Notably, among high-performing tech CxO respondents defined in the survey, the study found that organizations that connect technology investments to measurable business outcomes report 12% higher revenue growth.
Talk about outcomes, not about data: "Focus on shared objectives by finding a common language with the business based on enhancing the customer experience and delivering outcomes. Use storytelling and scenario-based exercises to drive tech and the business to a shared understanding of the customer journey and pain points."
It’s the usual information with an updated spin on investing in the future, diversifying the workforce, and listening to the needs of workers. It’s the same stuff in a new package.
Whitney Grace, September 19, 2024
Why Governments May Not Adore Mr. Musk and Mr. Zuck
September 18, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
When I was in grade school, my family lived in Campinas, Brazil. Today, Campinas is a quasi suburb of São Paulo. In the 1950s, not too many non-Brazilians called the small city home. I remember messages painted on the stucco walls surrounding our house. Most of them were saying, “Yanqui, vá para casa.” We had a few caricatures of Uncle Sam too. My father arranged for the walls to be repainted every two weeks, but the message was clear. Whatever the US was up to in the 1950s, some of the residents of Campinas were not too happy my family had arrived.
Two self-important young professionals find themselves excluded from a party with many important people in attendance. Neither can understand why the people throwing the party from Australia, Brazil, and the UK did not invite them. Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Good enough.
What do American companies do to engender such negative responses. There may be some clues
Flash forward to today, the sentiment of some Brazilians is unchanged. In fact, a group of Brazilian judges effectively kicked Mr. Elon Musk’s companies out of the country. The decision was adjusted to enable Mr. Musk to pay some fines. I don’t think he will be trying to hit the beach in Guaruja for some time. I learned that Mr. Musk is unhappy with Australia. “Elon Musk Outraged by Australia’s Proposed Misinformation Law” reports:
Musk dubs the Australian government ‘fascist’ for proposing a law that would require all social media platforms to comply with stricter content moderation rules.
My thought is that Mr. Musk may find that some Australians in positions of authority in the government may determine that Mr. Musk is a person who perceives himself as above the law in the country. My few experiences with the Australian government left me with the understanding that one should not kick a sleeping kangaroo.
But it is not just Mr. Musk taking actions which create pushback for the US.
Consider Mark Zuckerberg or in my lingo Mr. Zuck.
Smart software and disinformation are of concern in many countries. In some countries, one can end up in a very unpleasant rehabilitation program or just dead for creating unauthorized or off-the-reservation disinformation. “Meta Hides ‘AI Info’ Labels for Edited Content on Facebook, Instagram” reports:
Meta is reducing the visibility of "AI Info" labels on Facebook, Instagram, and Threads. Starting next week, for content modified or edited using AI tools, the label will be found in the post’s menu, the company announced in an updated blog post on Thursday. This means the labels won’t be quite as visible as before. The revised policy only applies to AI-edited content, the company says. For content generated using an AI tool, Meta will continue to display the "AI Info" label under the username and share whether media is labeled "because of industry-shared signals or because someone self-disclosed." Once the update rolls out, to check whether the content was altered using AI, users will have to tap the menu button at the top right of a post and pick "AI Info."
My thought is that this policy is likely to be scrutinized by governments in a number of other countries. Even thought Mr. Zuck is in active dialog with the EU and the UK, this policy may raise some eyebrows. In nation states assumed to be allies of the US, social disorder is evident. Thus, a service which might spark more unrest is not likely to be viewed as a net positive social good. But Mr. Zuck has his own vision, and it does not linger too long on some rules or what I would call common sense actions.
What do these two high-technology leaders think about other countries’ laws?
I would suggest that these two example illustrate behaviors which are likely to be viewed as contentious. Let’s assume the citizens of the countries with annoyed regulators rebel and protest? The answer is some strong sentiment for and against the US, its ability to control commercial enterprises operating in America may increase the likelihood of anti-US feelings.
Net net: One will have to present some solid evidence that taking actions which either directly or indirectly go against the laws in many countries is a good thing. I do know that if these behaviors escalate, the sale of spray paint will go up and America will not be among the most popular countries in some nation states. Do Mr. Musk or Mr. Zuck care? I don’t think so, but that is just my opinion.
Stephen E Arnold, September 18, 2024
Great Moments in Leadership: Drive an Uber
September 18, 2024
I was zipping through my newsfeed and spotted this item: “Ex-Sony Boss Tells Laid-Off Employees to Drive an Uber and Find a Cheap Place to Live.” In the article, the ex-Sony boss is quoted as allegedly saying:
I think it’s probably very painful for the managers, but I don’t think that having skill in this area is going to be a lifetime of poverty or limitation. It’s still where the action is, and it’s like the pandemic but now you’re going to have to take a few…figure out how to get through it, drive an Uber or whatever, go off to find a cheap place to live and go to the beach for a year.
I admit that I find the advice reasonably practical. However, it costs money to summon an Uber. The other titbit is that a person without a job should find a “cheap place to live.” Ah, ha, van life or moving in with a friend. Possibly one could become a homeless person dwelling near a beach. What if the terminated individual has a family? I suppose there are community food services.
From an employee’s point of view, this is “tough love” management. How effective is this approach? I have worked for a number of firms in my 50 plus year career prior to my retiring in 2013. I can honestly say that this Uber and move to a cheaper place to live is remarkable. It is novel. Possibly a breakthrough in management methods.
I look forward to a TED talk from this leader. When will the Harvard Business Review present a more in-depth look at the former Sony president’s ideas? Oh, right. “Former” is the operative word. Yep, former.
Stephen E Arnold, September 17, 2024
Surveillance: Who Watches What, When, and Who?
September 18, 2024
Here is an interesting resource: Surveillance Watch compiles information about surveillance tech firms, organizations that fund them, and the regions in which they are said to operate. The lists, compiled from contributions by visitors to the site, are not comprehensive. But they are full of useful information. The About page states:
“Surveillance technology and spyware are being used to target and suppress journalists, dissidents, and human rights advocates everywhere. Surveillance Watch is an interactive map that documents the hidden connections within the opaque surveillance industry. Founded by privacy advocates, most of whom were personally harmed by surveillance tech, our mission is to shed light on the companies profiting from this exploitation with significant risk to our lives. By mapping out the intricate web of surveillance companies, their subsidiaries, partners, and financial backers, we hope to expose the enablers fueling this industry’s extensive rights violations, ensuring they cannot evade accountability for being complicit in this abuse. Surveillance Watch is a community-driven initiative, and we rely on submissions from individuals passionate about protecting privacy and human rights.”
Yes, the site makes it easy to contribute information to its roundup. Anonymously, if one desires. The site’s information is divided into three alphabetical lists: Surveilling Entities, Known Targets, and Funding Organizations. As an example, here is what the service says about safeXai (formerly Banjo):
“safeXai is the entity that has quietly resumed the operations of Banjo, a digital surveillance company whose founder, Damien Patton, was a former Ku Klux Klan member who’d participated in a 1990 drive-by shooting of a synagogue near Nashville, Tennessee. Banjo developed real-time surveillance technology that monitored social media, traffic cameras, satellites, and other sources to detect and report on events as they unfolded. In Utah, Banjo’s technology was used by law enforcement agencies.”
We notice there are no substantive links which could have been included, like ones to footage of the safeXai surveillance video service or the firm’s remarkable body of patents. In our view, these patents represent an X-ray look at what most firms call artificial intelligence.
A few other names we recognize are IBM, Palantir, and Pegasus owner NSO Group. See the site for many more. The Known Targets page lists countries that, when clicked, list surveilling entities known or believed to be operating there. Entries on the Funding Organizations page include a brief description of each organization with a clickable list of surveillance apps it is known or believed to fund at the bottom. It is not clear how the site vets its entries, but the submission form does include boxes for supporting URL(s) and any files to upload. It also asks whether one consents to be contacted for more information.
Cynthia Murrell, September 18, 2024
CrowdStrike: Whiffing Security As a Management Precept
September 17, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
Not many cyber security outfits can make headlines like NSO Group. But no longer. A new buzz champion has crowned: CrowdStrike. I learned a bit more about the company’s commitment to rigorous engineering and exemplary security practices. “CrowdStrike Ex-Employees: Quality Control Was Not Part of Our Process.” NSO Group’s rise to stardom was propelled by its leadership and belief in the superiority of Israeli security-related engineering. CrowdStrike skipped that and perfected a type of software that could strand passengers, curtail surgeries, and force Microsoft to rethink its own wonky decisions about kernel access.
A trained falcon tells an onlooker to go away. The falcon, a stubborn bird, has fallen in love with a limestone gargoyle. Its executive function resists inputs. Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Good enough.
The write up says:
Software engineers at the cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike complained about rushed deadlines, excessive workloads, and increasing technical problems to higher-ups for more than a year before a catastrophic failure of its software paralyzed airlines and knocked banking and other services offline for hours.
Let’s assume this statement is semi-close to the truth pin on the cyber security golf course. In fact, the company insists that it did not cheat like a James Bond villain playing a round of golf. The article reports:
CrowdStrike disputed much of Semafor’s reporting and said the information came from “disgruntled former employees, some of whom were terminated for clear violations of company policy.” The company told Semafor: “CrowdStrike is committed to ensuring the resiliency of our products through rigorous testing and quality control, and categorically rejects any claim to the contrary.”
I think someone at CrowdStrike has channeled a mediocre law school graduate and a former PR professional from a mid-tier publicity firm in Manhattan, lower Manhattan, maybe in Alphabet City.
The article runs through a litany of short cuts. You can read the original article and sort them out.
The company’s flagship product is called “Falcon.” The idea is that the outstanding software can, like a falcon, spot its prey (a computer virus). Then it can solve trajectory calculations and snatch the careless gopher. One gets a plump Falcon and one gopher filling in for a burrito at a convenience store on the Information Superhighway.
The killer paragraph in the story, in my opinion, is:
Ex-employees cited increased workloads as one reason they didn’t improve upon old code. Several said they were given more work following staff reductions and reorganizations; CrowdStrike declined to comment on layoffs and said the company has “consistently grown its headcount year over year.” It added that R&D expenses increased from $371.3 million to $768.5 million from fiscal years 2022 to 2024, “the majority of which is attributable to increased headcount.”
I buy the complaining former employee argument. But the article cites a number of CloudStrikers who are taking their expertise and work ethic elsewhere. As a result, I think the fault is indeed a management problem.
What does one do with a bad Falcon? I would put a hood on the bird and let it scroll TikToks. Bewits and bells would alert me when one of these birds were getting close to me.
Stephen E Arnold, September 16, 2024
The EU Has a Small Sense of Humor: X.com Is Under Endowed?
September 17, 2024
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
Elon Musk has a big rocket. Elon Musk has a big car company. Elon Musk has a big hole making machine. But Elon Musk has a high-technology social media outfit which is too small.
I think European regulators have a sense of humor. Furthermore, calling attention to Mr. Musk’s fascination with “big,” the characterization is likely to evoke eye rolls and some nudges among those in the know. Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Good enough, a bit like a Tesla.
I read “Musk’s X Deemed Too Small for EU Crackdown on Big Tech Power.” Small, yes. The “real news” report says:
X will dodge the DMA’s raft of dos and don’ts because it isn’t a powerful enough service for business users and doesn’t meet certain revenue thresholds, according to the people, who spoke under condition of anonymity.
Okay, small and impotent.
Let’s look at the “too small” judgment compared to Brazil’s approach. The EU pushes the little bitty X thingy idea; Brazil kicked X.com out of the country. The Brazilian action reacted to X.com as if it were a big outfit with an outsized reach, from the beach in Rio to the sky above Cristo Redentor. Brazil relaxed its freeze on X.com’s bank account so the big X.com fine could be paid.
Observations:
- X.com is too small. Ouch. Intentional or not, this has to remind someone of crude jokes in the high school boys’ locker room.
- The EU wants to make it crystal clear that its actions will be directed at the really big US high-technology outfits which violate assorted EU rules and regulations, write checks for fines, and keep on doing what the companies choose to do.
- Slapping a label on a company which presents itself as a global blockbuster illustrates some disdain.
Net net: Brazil went big. The EU goes small. Very small, X.com, tinier than a Telegram.
Stephen E Arnold, September 17, 2024
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
