Will Tim Apple Vacation in Sochi?
November 18, 2024
![dino-orange_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_[1]](https://arnoldit.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/dino-orange_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_1.gif "dino-orange_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_[1]")
No smart software. Just a dumb dinobaby. Oh, the art? Yeah, MidJourney.
I love the idea that “It’s just business.” Forget special operations, people falling from windows high above the cobbles, and wheeling and dealing with alleged axis of evil outfits. Focus on doing what is going to sell product. That is the guiding light.
Immanuel Kant, in the midst of pondering his philosophical treatise about ethics, considers the question of the apple on his desk. Thanks, MidJourney. Good enough.
I read the allegedly accurate write up “Apple Removes Another RFE/RL App at Request of Russian Regulator.” The story reports as actual factual:
Roskomnadzor notified Apple that the Russian Service app contains materials from an organization whose activities in Russia have been declared “undesirable.”
What did Apple do (hey, that’s a t-shirt slogan, WDAD)? According to the the cited article:
U.S. technology giant Apple has notified RFE/RL that it has removed another of its apps following a request from Russia’s media regulator, Roskomnadzor. The newly removed RFE/RL app is that of the Russian Service, which in turn hosts the websites of its regional projects Siberia.Realities and North.Realities. Apple had previously removed the apps for RFE/RL’s Kyrgyz Service and Current Time, the Russian-language TV and digital network run by RFE/RL.
The acronym RRE/RL is GenX speak for Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty. In case you are not familiar with these efforts, the US government funds the broadcasting organizations. The idea is to provide “real” news, information, and analysis (insight) to avid listeners in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and the Middle East.
The write up adds:
RFE/RL President Stephen Capus called the decision “yet another example of how the Russian government sees truthful reporting as an existential threat.” Besides RFE/RL’s apps, Apple also removed or hid several Russian-language podcasts produced by independent journalists.
From my point of view, the US government wants to provide information to citizens in some countries. Russian authorities do not want that information to flow to residents of those countries. So the Russian authorities told Apple to remove an app which allowed iPhone owners to access certain information deemed unsuitable to citizens in some countries of interest to Russia. I think I am following this … mostly.
Then Apple said, “No problem.” The extremely well-loved Cupertino, California, outfit removed the applications offensive to Russian authorities. Then — let me get this straight in my dinobaby brain — Apple notified Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty professionals, “Yo, dudes, we rolled over for Vlad and his agents.”
Have I got this right? Apple wants to government to disseminate the information Russia does not like. That’s helpful, Apple.
Several observations:
- Is Apple more powerful in terms of information dissemination than Google and its allegedly reviled video service which has notable performance problems in Russia and parts of the Russian Federation?
- Is the US government supposed to amp up its dissemination of information to the affected nation states? (Well, thanks for the guidance Apple.)
- Is Apple supporting the US government or actively assisting a nation state whose leadership continues to talk about nuclear bombs and existential threats to Mr. Putin’s home base?
My hunch is that Apple, like a handful of other commercial entities, perceives itself as a nation state. The pesky government officials — regardless of where they lives —have to be kept happy. The real objective is keeping those revenues flowing.
Did Immanuel Kant cover this angle in his “Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals”? Oh, the apple on Kant’s desk has disintegrated.
Stephen E Arnold, November 18, 2024
Google: Another Court Decision, Another Appeal, Rinse, Repeat
December 12, 2023
This essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.
How long will the “loss” be tied up in courts? Answer: As long as possible.
I am going to skip the “what Google did” reports and focus on what I think is a quite useful list. The items in the list apply to Apple and Google, and I am not sure the single list is the best way to present what may be “clever” ways to dominate a market. But I will stick with what Echelon provided at this YCombinator link.
Two warring samurai find that everyone in the restaurant is a customer. The challenge becomes getting “more.” Thanks, MSFT Copilot. Good enough.
What does the list present? I interpreted the post as a “racket analysis.” Your mileage may vary:
Apple is horrible, but Google isn’t blameless.
Google and Apple are a duopoly that controls one of the most essential devices of our time. Their racket extends more broadly than Standard Oil. The smartphone is a critical piece of modern life, and these two companies control every aspect of them.
- Tax 30%
- Control when and how software can be deployed
- Can pull software or deny updates
- Prevent web downloads (Apple)
- Sell ads on top of your app name or brand
- Scare / confuse users about web downloads or app installs (Google)
- Control the payment rails
- Enforce using their identity and customer management (Apple)
- Enforce using their payment rails (Apple)
- Becoming the de-facto POS payment methods (for even more taxation)
- Partnering with governments to be identity providers
- Default search provider
- Default browser
- Prevent other browser runtimes (Apple)
- Prevent browser tech from being comparable to native app installs (mostly Apple)
- Unfriendly to repairs
- Unfriendly to third party components (Apple)
- Battery not replaceable
- Unofficial pieces break core features due to cryptographic signing (Apple)
- Updates obsolete old hardware
- Green bubbles (Apple)
- Tactics to cause FOMO in children (Apple)
- Growth into media (movie studios, etc.) to keep eyeballs on their platforms (Apple)
- Growth into music to keep eyeballs on their platforms
There are no other companies in the world with this level of control over such an important, cross-cutting, cross-functional essential item. If we compared the situation to auto manufacturers, there would be only two providers, you could only fuel at their gas stations, they’d charge businesses every time you visit, they’d display ads constantly, and you’d be unable to repair them without going to the provider. There need to be more than two providers. And if we can’t get more than two providers, then most of these unfair advantages need to be rolled back by regulators. This is horrific.
My team and I leave it to you to draw conclusions about the upsides and downsides of a techno feudal set up. What’s next? Appeals, hearings, trials, judgment, appeals, hearings, and trials. Change? Unlikely for now.
Stephen E Arnold, December 12, 2023
Citation Manipulation: Fiddling for Fame and Grant Money Perhaps?
July 24, 2023
![Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[1]](http://arnoldit.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t1-48.gif "Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[1]")
Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.
A fact about science and academia is that these fields are incredibly biased. Researchers, scientists, and professors are always on the hunt for funding and prestige. While these professionals state they uphold ethical practices, they are still human. In other words, they violate their ethics for a decent reward. Another prize for these individuals is being published, but even publishers are becoming impartial says Nature in, “Researchers Who Agree To Manipulate Citations Are More Likely To Get Their Papers Published.”
A former university researcher practices his new craft: Rigging die for gangs running crap games. He said to my fictional interviewer, “The skills are directly transferable. I use die manufactured by other people. I manipulate them. My degrees in statistics allow me to calculate what weights are needed to tip the odds. This new job pays well too. I do miss the faculty meetings, but the gang leaders often make it clear that if I need anything special, those fine gentlemen will accommodate my wishes.” MidJourney seems to have an affinity for certain artistic creations like people who create loaded dice.
A recent study from Research Policy discovered that researchers are coerced by editors to include superfluous citations in their papers. Those that give into the editors have a higher chance of getting published. If the citations are relevant to the researchers’ topic, what is the big deal? The problem is that the citations might not accurately represent the research nor augment the original data. There is also the pressure to comply with industry politics:
“When scientists are coerced into padding their papers with citations, the journal editor might be looking to boost either their journal’s or their own citation counts, says study author Eric Fong, who studies research management at the University of Alabama in Huntsville. In other cases, peer reviewers might try to persuade authors to cite their work. Citation rings, in which multiple scholars or journals agree to cite each other excessively, can be harder to spot, because there are several stakeholders involved, instead of just two academics disproportionately citing one another.”
The study is over a decade old, but its results pertain to today’s scientific and academia environment. Academic journals want to inflate their citations to “justify” their importance to the industry and maybe even keeping the paywall incentive. Researchers are also pressured to add more authors, because it helps someone pad their resume.
These are not good practices to protect science and academia’s’ integrity, but it is better than lying about results.
Whitney Grace, July 24, 2023
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
