Google X Has a New Logo! And Revenue? Nah.
January 13, 2016
More on the Alphabet Google front this morning (January 13, 2016). I have been working on my new webinar about Dark Web investigative tools but I had to comment on “Google X Has a New Logo and a New Plan to turn Moonshots into Actual Businesses.”
That should be encouraging to the stakeholders wondering about balloons and solving death, among other Google activities.
The write up says:
After the Alphabet reorg, Google X will not stop backing moonshots, but it is sharpening its focus to quell some of this anxiety. It’s framing itself as Alphabet’s incubator, taking ambitious projects, taming them into viable businesses, then “graduating” them into standalone operations. It has also creating tighter criteria for deciding when these projects should be put to rest, assembling a new group — called the Foundry — designed to steer moonshots through the life-or-death throes.
That’s encouraging. More bureaucracy. More after the fact planning. More logos.
Progress is evident at the Alphabet Google thing. I still marvel at balloons, however. And the death thing. Wow. Bell Labs mostly focused on stuff somewhat related to telephones. But the Alphabet Google thing has more scope and sweep. Balloons. At times, even IBM Watson’s wonkiness looks pretty solid. Death.
Stephen E Arnold, January 13, 2016
Google: Autos and Virtual Reality. Search? Not So Important?
January 13, 2016
I read two stories about the new Alphabet Google thing and its foci for 2016.
The first report comes from McPaper in the story “Google Forms Virtual Reality Division As Facebook Rivalry Heats Up.” The main idea is that Facebook is pitching virtual reality and getting lots of media coverage. The response for the Alphabet Google thing has been to do a reorganization.
Now I don’t much about virtual reality and I know zippo about modern management theory. I do think that when a giant company with many interests outside of the firm’s core technology does a reorganization after the Consumer Electronic Show, that’s a signal of note.
Has Google pulled a “let’s buy Motorola” or a “let’s reorganize now” maneuver?
Sure, looks like a knee jerk.
Meanwhile the Google is showing some signs of promiscuity. I read “Google Self-Driving Car Boss to Automakers: ‘We Hope to Work with Many of You Guys’.” I presume that the Alphabet Google thing will answer phone calls from those who want to work with the GOOG. The write up points out that there is a new president of the “self driving car project.” Hmm. President of project. I thought the title for that type of work was “project manager.”
The new Alphabet Google thing seems to be batting its Jack Benny blue eyes at anyone who finds the cachet of the search vendor alluring.
Zebras can change their stripes one assumes.
And search. Er, what?
Stephen E Arnold, January 13, 2016
Big Data Shows Its Return on Investment
January 13, 2016
Big data was the word that buzzed through the IT community and made companies revaluate their data analytics and consider new ways to use structured and unstructured information to their benefit. Business2Community shares how big data has affected companies in sixteen case studies: “16 Case Studies Of Companies Proving ROI Of Big Data.” One of the problems companies faced when implementing a big data plan was whether or not they would see a return on their investment. Some companies saw an immediate return, but others are still scratching their heads. Enough time has passed to see how various corporations in different industries have leaned.
Companies remain committed to implementing big data plans into their frameworks, most of what they want to derive from big data is how to use it effectively:
- “91% of marketing leaders believe successful brands use customer data to drive business decisions (source: BRITE/NYAMA)
- 87% agree capturing and sharing the right data is important to effectively measuring ROI in their own company (BRITE/NYAMA)
- 86% of people are willing to pay more for a great customer experience with a brand (souce: Lunch Pail)”
General Electric uses big data to test their products’ efficiently and the crunch the analytics to increase productivity. The Weather Channel analyzes its users behavior patterns along with climate data in individual areas to become an advertising warehouse. The big retailer Wal-Mart had added machine learning, synonym mining, and text analysis to increase search result relevancy. Semantic search has also increased online shopping by ten percent.
The article highlights many other big brand companies and how big data has become a boon for businesses looking to increase their customer relations, increase sales, and improve their services.
Whitney Grace, January 13, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Feeding the Google AI Beast and Keeping in Mind, You Are What You Eat
January 13, 2016
The article titled We are All SkyNet in the Googlesphere on Disinformation refers to the Terminator’s controlling A.I., SkyNet, who determines the beginning of a machine age in the movie, and the conspiracy that Google is taking on that role in reality. Is it easy to understand the fear of Google’s reach, it does sometimes seem like a gigantic arm with a thousand hands groping about in cyberspace, and collecting little pieces of information that on their own seem largely harmless. The article discusses cloud computing and its relationship to the conspiracy,
“When you need your bits of info, your computer gathers them from the cloud again. The cloud is SkyNet’s greatest line of defense, as you can’t kill what is spread out over an entire network. Since the magnificent expose of the NSA and their ability to (at least) access every keystroke, file or phone call and Google’s (at minimum) complicity in managing the data, that is to say, nearly all data being collected, it’s hard to imagine the limitations to what any such Google AI program could learn.”
The article ends philosophically with the suggestion that the nature of a modern day SkyNet will depend on the data that it gathers from us, that we will create the monster in our likeness. This may not be where we expected the article to go, but it does make sense. Google as a company will not determine it, at least if literature has taught us anything.
Chelsea Kerwin, January 13, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Boolean Search: Will George Boole Rotate in His Grave?
January 12, 2016
Boolean logic is, for most math wonks, the father of Boolean logic. This is a nifty way to talk about sets and what they contain. One can perform algebra and differential equations whilst pondering George and his method for thinking about fruits when he went shopping.
In the good old days of search, there was one way to search. One used AND, OR, NOT, and maybe a handful of other logic operators to retrieve information from structured indexes and content. Most folks with a library science degree or a friendly math major can explain Boolean reasonably well. Here’s an example which might even work on CSA ProQuest (nèe Lockheed Dialog) even today:
CC=77? AND scam?
The systems when fed the right query would reply with pretty good precision and recall. Precision provided info that was supposed to be useful. Recall meant that what should be included was in the result set.
I thought about Boole, fruit, and logic when I read “The Best Boolean and Semantic Search Tool.” Was I going to read about SDC’s ORBIT, ESA Quest, or (heaven help me) the original Lexis system?
Nope.
I learned about LinkedIn. Not one word about Palantir’s injecting Boolean logic squarely in the middle of its advanced data management processes. Nope.
LinkedIn. I thought that LinkedIn used open source Lucene, but maybe the company has invested in Exorbyte, Funnelback, or some other information access system.
The write up stated:
If you use any source of human capital data to find and recruit people (e.g., your ATS/CRM, resume databases, LinkedIn, Google, Facebook, Github, etc.) and you really want to understand how to best approach your talent sourcing efforts, I recommend watching this video when you have the time.
Okay, human resource functions. LinkedIn, right.
But there is zero content in the write up. I was pointed to a video called “Become a LinkedIn Search Ninja: Advanced Boolean Search” on YouTube.
Here’s what I learned before I killed the one hour video:
- The speaker is in charge of personnel and responsible for Big Data activities related to human resources
- Search is important to LinkedIn users
- Profiles of people are important
- Use OR. (I found this suggestion amazing.)
- Use iterative, probabilistic, and natural language search, among others. (Yep, that will make sense to personnel professionals.)
Okay. I hit the stop button. Not only will George be rotating, I may have nightmares.
Please, let librarians explicitly trained in online search and retrieval explain methods for obtaining on point results. Failing a friendly librarian, ask someone who has designed a next generation system which provides “helpers” to allow the user to search and get useful outputs.
Entity queries are important. LinkedIn can provide some useful information. The tools to obtain that high value information are a bit more sophisticated than the recommendations in this video.
Stephen E Arnold, January 12, 2016
Search Is Marketing and Lots of Other Stuff Like Semantics
January 12, 2016
I spoke with a person who asked me, “Have you seen the 2013 Dave Amerland video? The video in question is “Google Semantic Search and its Impact on Business.”
I hadn’t. I watched the five-minute video and formed some impressions / opinions about the information presented. Now I wish I had not invested five minutes in serial content processing.
First, the premise is that search is marketing does not match up with my view of search. In short, search is more than marketing, although some view search as essential to making a sale.
Second, the video generates buzzwords. There’s knowledge graph, semantic, reputation, Big Data, and more. If one accepts the premise that search is about sales, I am not sure what these buzzwords contribute. The message is that when a user looks for something, the system should display a message that causes a sale. Objectivity does not have much to do with this, nor do buzzwords.
Third, presentation of the information was difficult for me to understand. My attention was undermined by the wild and wonderful assertions about the buzzwords. I struggled with “from stings to things, from Web sites to people.” What?
The video is ostensibly about the use of “semantics” in content. I am okay with semantic processes. I understand that keeping words and metaphors consistent are helpful to a human and to a Web indexing system.
But the premise. I have a tough time buying in. I want search to return high value, on point content. I want those who create content to include helpful information, details about sources, and markers that make it possible for a reader to figure out what’s sort of accurate and what’s opinion.
I fear that the semantics practiced in this video shriek, “Hire me.” I also note that the video is a commercial for a book which presumably amplifies the viewpoint expressed in the video. That means the video vocalizes, “Buy my book.”
Heck, I am happy if I can an on point result set when I run a query. No shrieking. No vocalization. No buzzwords. Will objective search be possible?
Stephen E Arnold, January 12, 2016
Dickens, the Dark Web, and IDG 2016
January 12, 2016
I read “The Dark Web & Business Report: A Seedy Dickensian Underworld Online.” It appears that this is a distillation of a longer and probably not free document from the mavens at IDG.
I noted this passage:
In reality, the dark web is a set of services, accessed via special gateways or software configurations that leverage encryption technology to make access or communication anonymous to a greater or lesser extent.
This is a statement from one of the employees / executives at one of the 31 companies interviewed for the report.
The full write up is a helpful summary for a person who wants to gave the chestnuts about the “hidden” Internet roasted with literary chestnuts.
What made the write up less than appetizing was the string of references to Charles Dickens. I am not sure that the Dickensian underworld was a reality, but it was a wonderful literary convention and helped sell books.
Is the inspiration for IDG anchored in reality or a Dickensian fiction? I thought of American Notes and this statement offered by Mr. Dickens:
“All that is loathsome, drooping, or decayed is here.”
No problem. Charlie ran into some money difficulties when reality collided with his made up world. Consulting firms, particularly the mid tier variety, face an interesting challenge in 2016. My appetite for Dark Web information is unsated.
Stephen E Arnold, January 12, 2016
The Business World Is Not Prepared for a Cyber Attack
January 12, 2016
Cyber threats have been a concerning topics since computers became functional and daily tools for people. The idea of a hacker brings up images of IT geeks sitting in a dark basement with their laptops and cracking top secret codes in a matter of keystrokes. Hacking has turned from a limited crime to a huge international problem comparable to the mafia. While hackers are interested in targeting individuals, the bolder thieves target big businesses. News of Bahrain shares that “Biz Not Prepared For Cyber Threat,” translated from headline speech that means the business world would not withstand a cyber attack.
KPMG International released the 2015 KPMG CEO Outlook Study that found businesses are aware of risks associated with cyber attacks, but only forty-nine percent have prepared for one. The study surveyed 1,200 CEOs and one out of five are concerned about cyber risks. The concern has led many CEOs to take action with security measures and safety plans.
“ ‘The most innovative companies have recognized that cyber security is a customer experience, not just a risk that needs to be managed or a line item in the budget. In Bahrain, some firms are finding ways to turn cyber preparedness into a competitive advantage with customers, and they are using this as a differentiator.’ ”
Many companies that are attacked thought they were prepared for any threats, but they underestimated hackers’ intelligence, sophistication, and persistence.
Some of the companies with good cyber security are advertising their technical achievements to prevent attacks. It is a desirable feature, especially as more information is housed on cloud storage and businesses need to be aware of potential threats.
Whitney Grace, January 12, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Authors Guild Loses Fair Use Argument, Petitions Supreme Court for Copyright Fee Payment from Google
January 12, 2016
The article on Fortune titled Authors Guild Asks Supreme Court to Hear Google Books Copyright Case continues the 10 year battle over Google’s massive book scanning project. Only recently in October of 2015 the Google project received a ruling in their favor due to the “transformative” nature of the scanning from a unanimous appeals court. Now the Authors Guild, with increasing desperation to claim ownership over their work, takes the fight to the Supreme Court for consideration. The article explains,
“The Authors Guild may be hoping the high profile nature of the case, which at one time transfixed the tech and publishing communities, will tempt the Supreme Court to weigh in on the scope of fair use… “This case represents an unprecedented judicial expansion of the fair-use doctrine that threatens copyright protection in the digital age. The decision below authorizing mass copying, distribution, and display of unaltered content conflicts with this Court’s decisions and the Copyright Act itself.”
In the petition to the Supreme Court, the Authors Guild is now requesting payment of copyright fees rather than a stoppage of the scanning of 20 million books. Perhaps they should have asked for that first, since Google has all but already won this one.
Chelsea Kerwin, January 12, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Dark Web: How Big Is It?
January 11, 2016
I read “Big Data and the Deep, Dark Web.” The write up raises an important point. I question the data, however.
First, there is the unpleasant task of dealing with terminology. A number of different phrases appear in the write up; for example:
- Dark Web
- Deep Web
- Surface Web
- Web World Wide
Getting hard data about the “number” of Web pages or Web sites is an interesting problem. I know that popular content gets indexed frequently. That makes sense in an ad-driven business model. I know that less frequently indexed content often is an unhappy consequence of resource availability. It takes time and money to index every possible link on each index cycle. I know that network latency can cause an indexing system to move on to another, more responsive site. Then there is bad code, intentional obfuscation such as my posting content on Xenky.com for those who attend my LEA/Intelligence lectures sponsored by Telestrategies in information friendly Virginia.
Then what is the difference between the Surface Web, which I call the Clear Web which allows access to a Wall Street Journal article when I click a link from one site and not from another. The Wall Street Journal requires a user name and password—sometimes. So what is this? A Clear Web site or a visible, not accessible site?
The terminology is messy.
Bright Planet coined the Deep Web moniker decades ago. The usage was precise: These are sites which are not static; for example dynamically generated Web pages. An example would be the Southwest Airlines fare page. A user has to click in order to get the pricing options. Bright Planet also included password protected sites. Examples range from a company’s Web page for employees to sites which require the user to pay money to gain access.
Then we have the semi exciting Dark Web, which can also be referenced as the Hidden Web.
Most folks writing about the number of Web sites or Web pages available in one of these collections are pretty much making up data.
Here’s an example of fanciful numerics. Note the disclaimers which is a flashing yellow caution light for me:
Accurately determining the size of the deep web or the dark web is all but impossible. In 2001, it was estimated that the deep web contained 7,500 terabytes of information. The surface web, by comparison, contained only 19 terabytes of content at the time. What we do know is that the deep web has between 400 and 550 times more public information than the surface web. More than 200,000 deep web sites currently exist. Together, the 60 largest deep web sites contain around 750 terabytes of data, surpassing the size of the entire surface web by 40 times. Compared with the few billion individual documents on the surface web, 550 billion individual documents can be found on the deep web. A total of 95 percent of the deep web is publically accessible, meaning no fees or subscriptions.
Where do these numbers come from? How many sites require Tor to access their data. I am working on my January Webinar for Telestrategies. Sorry. Attendance is limited to those active in LEA/Intelligence/Security. I queried one of the firm’s actively monitoring and indexing Dark Web content. That company which you may want to pay attention to is Terbium Labs. Visit them at www.terbiumlabs.com. Like most of the outfits involved in Dark Web analytics, certain information is not available. I was able to get some ball park figures from one of the founders. (He is pretty good with counting since he is a sci-tech type with industrial strength credentials in the math oriented world of advanced physics.
Here’s the information I obtained which comes from Terbium Labs’s real time monitoring of the Dark Web:
We [Terbium Labs] probably have the most complete picture of it [the Dark Web] compared to most anyone out there. While we don’t comment publicly on our specific coverage, in our estimation, the Dark Web, as we loosely define it, consists of a few tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of domains, including light web paste sites and carding forums, Tor hidden services, i2p sites, and others. While the Dark Web is large enough that it is impossible to comprehensively consume by human analysts, compared with the billion or so light web domains, it is relatively compact.
My take is that the Dark Web is easy to talk about. it is more difficult to obtained informed analysis of the Dark Web, what is available, which sites are operated by law enforcement and government agencies which sites are engaged actively is Dark Web commerce, information exchange, publishing, and other tasks.
One final point: The Dark Web uses Web protocols. In a sense, the Dark Web is little more than a suburb of the metropolis that Google indexes selectively. For more information about the Dark Web and its realities, check out my forthcoming Dark Web Notebook. If you want to reserve a copy, email benkent2020 at yahoo dot com. LEA, intel, and security professionals get a discount. Others pay $200 per copy.
Stephen E Arnold, January 11, 2016
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
