Oracle: Pricked by a Rose and Still Bleeding

April 15, 2025

How disappointing. DoublePulsar documents a senior tech giant’s duplicity in, “Oracle Attempt to Hide Serious Cybersecurity Incident from Customers in Oracle SaaS Service.” Blogger Kevin Beaumont cites reporting by Bleeping Computer as he tells us someone going by rose87168 announced in March they had breached certain Oracle services. The hacker offered to remove individual companies’ data for a price. They also invited Oracle to email them to discuss the matter. The company, however, immediately denied there had been a breach. It should know better by now.

Rose87168 responded by releasing evidence of the breach, piece by piece. For example, they shared a recording of an internal Oracle meeting, with details later verified by Bleeping Computer and Hudson Rock. They also shared the code for Oracle configuration files, which proved to be current. Beaumont writes:

“In data released to a journalist for validation, it has now become 100% clear to me that there has been cybersecurity incident at Oracle, involving systems which processed customer data. … All the systems impacted are directly managed by Oracle. Some of the data provided to journalists is current, too. This is a serious cybersecurity incident which impacts customers, in a platform managed by Oracle. Oracle are attempting to wordsmith statements around Oracle Cloud and use very specific words to avoid responsibility. This is not okay. Oracle need to clearly, openly and publicly communicate what happened, how it impacts customers, and what they’re doing about it. This is a matter of trust and responsibility. Step up, Oracle — or customers should start stepping off.”

In an update to the original post, Beaumont notes some linguistic slight-of-hand employed by the company:

“Oracle rebadged old Oracle Cloud services to be Oracle Classic. Oracle Classic has the security incident. Oracle are denying it on ‘Oracle Cloud’ by using this scope — but it’s still Oracle cloud services that Oracle manage. That’s part of the wordplay.”

However, it seems the firm finally admitted the breach was real to at least some users. Just not in in black and white. We learn:

“Multiple Oracle cloud customers have reached out to me to say Oracle have now confirmed a breach of their services. They are only doing so verbally, they will not write anything down, so they’re setting up meetings with large customers who query. This is similar behavior to the breach of medical PII in the ongoing breach at Oracle Health, where they will only provide details verbally and not in writing.”

So much for transparency. Beaumont pledges to keep investigating the breach and Oracle’s response to it. He invites us to follow his Mastodon account for updates.

Cynthis Murrell, April 15, 2025

Blockchain: Adoption Lag Lies in the Implementation

April 15, 2025

Why haven’t cryptocurrencies taken over the financial world yet? The Observer shares some theories in, "Blockchain’s Billion-Dollar Blunder: How Finance’s Tech Revolution Became an Awkward Evolution." Writer Boris Bohrer-Bilowitzki believes the mistake was trying to reinvent the wheel, instead of augmenting it. He observes:

"For years, the strategy has been replacement rather than integration. We’ve attempted to create entirely new financial systems from scratch, expecting the world to abandon centuries of established infrastructure overnight. It hasn’t worked, and it won’t work. … This disconnect highlights our fundamental misunderstanding of how technological evolution works. Credit cards didn’t replace cash; they complemented it. They added a layer of convenience and security that made transactions easier while working within the existing financial framework. That’s the model blockchain has always needed to follow."

Gee, it makes sense when you put it that way. The write-up points to Swift as an organization that gets it. We learn:

"One of the most promising developments in this space is the international banking system SWIFT’s ongoing blockchain pilot program. In 2025, SWIFT will facilitate live trials, enabling central and commercial banks across North America, Europe and Asia to conduct digital asset transactions on its network. These trials aim to explore how blockchain can enhance payments, foreign exchange (FX), securities trading and trade finance without requiring banks to overhaul their systems."

That sounds promising. But what about consumers? Many are baffled by the very concept of cryptocurrency, never mind how to interact with it. Intuitive interfaces, Bohrer-Bilowitzki stresses, would remove that hurdle. After all, he notes, folks only embrace new technologies that make their lives easier.

Did the esteemed Observer overlook these blockchain downsides?

  1. Distributed autonomous organizations look more like Discord groups and club members
  2. Wonky reward layers
  3. Funding “hopes” is losing some traction
  4. Web3 seems to filled with janky STARs.

Novelty alone is not enough to drive large-scale adoption. Imagine that.

Cynthia Murrell, April 16, 2025

Stanford AI Report: Credible or Just Marketing?

April 14, 2025

dino orange_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbNo AI. Just a dinobaby sharing an observation about younger managers and their innocence.

I am not sure I believe reports or much of anything from Stanford University. Let me explain my skepticism. Here’s one of the snips a quick search provided:

image

I think it was William James said great things about Stanford University when he bumped into the distinguished outfit. If Billie was cranking out Substacks, he would probably be quite careful in using words like “leadership,” “ethical behavior,” and the moral sanctity of big thinkers. Presidents don’t get hired like a temporary worker in front of Home Depot. There is a process, and it quite clear the process and the people and cultural process at the university failed. Failed spectacularly.

Stanford hired and retained a cheater if the news reports are accurate.

Now let’s look at “The 2025 AI Index Report.”

The document’s tone is one of lofty pronouncements.

Stanford mixes comments about smart software with statements like “

Global AI optimism is rising—but deep regional divides remain.

Yep, I would submit that AI-equipped weapons are examples of “regional divides.”

I think this report is:

  1. Marketing for Stanford’s smart software activities
  2. A reminder that another country (China) is getting really capable in smart software and may zip right past the noodlers in the Gates Computer Science Building
  3. Stanford wants to be a thought leader which helps the “image” of the school, the students, the faculty, and the wretches in fund raising who face a tough slog in the years ahead.

For me personally, I think the “report” should be viewed with skepticism. Why? A university which hires a cheater makes quite clear that the silly notions of William James are irrelevant.

I am not sure they are.

Stephen E Arnold, April 14, 2025

Ad Blockers and a Googley Consequence

April 11, 2025

dino orange_thumb_thumb_thumbAnother dinobaby blog post. Eight decades and still thrilled when I point out foibles.

Motivated individuals are acting in a manner usually associated with Cloudflare-type of outfits. The idea of a “man in the middle” is a good one. It works when one buys something from Amazon. The user wants convenience and does not take the time to hunt around for a better or cheaper version of a particular product.

Block YouTube Ads on AppleTV by Decrypting and Stripping Ads from Profobuf” provides a recipe for dumping advertisements in some streaming services, but the spotlight is on the lovable Google and Apple’s streaming device. (Poor Apple. Like its misfiring AI and definitely interesting glasses, the company caught a bright person’s attention.)

Social media needs two things: Beacons that phone home and advertising because how else is a company going to push products and services. The write up provides step-by-step instructions for chopping out ads from two big outfits.

Here’s what I think will happen at the monopolies:

  1. At least two software people will tackle this “problem”: One from Apple and one from Google.
  2. One will come up with a “fix” to the work-around
  3. The “fix” will be shared with the company who did not come up with an enhancement first
  4. The modified method will be deployed
  5. The game begins again.

The cat-and-mouse sequence is little more than that von Neumann game theory just in real life with money at stake. It’s too bad Johnny and his pals (some of whom were quite quirky) are not around to work on ad blocking instead of nuclear weapons.

Well, Johnny isn’t around, and I think that game theory does not work when one battles multi billion dollar monopolies with lots of reasonably bright people around providing they aren’t veterans of the Apple AI team or the original Google Glass product.

The write up is interesting. I admire the effort the author put into the blocking. How long will it persist? Good question, but the next iteration will probably be designed to preserve the money flow. Ads and user tracking are the means to the end: Big revenue.

Stephen E Arnold, April 11, 2025

Stamping Out Intelligence: Censorship May Work Wonders

April 9, 2025

dino orange_thumbSorry, no AI used to create this item.

I live in a state which has some interesting ideas. One of them is that the students are well educated. At this time, I think the state in which I reside holds position 47 out of 50 in terms of reading skills or academic performance. Are the numbers accurate? Probably not, but they indicate that learning is not priority number one in some quarters.

image

A young student with a gift for mathematics is the class dunce. He has to write on the chalk board, “I will not do linear algebra in class.” Thanks, OpenAI. Know any budding Einsteins in Mississippi?

However, there is a state which performs less well than mine. That state is Mississippi. Should that state hold the rank of the 50th less academically slick entity in the US. Probably not, but the low ranking does say something to some people.

I thought about this notion of “low academic performance” when I read “Mississippi Libraries Ordered to Delete Academic Research in Response to State Laws.” The write up says:

A state commission scrubbed academic research from a database used by Mississippi libraries and public schools — a move made to comply with recent state laws changing what content can be offered in libraries. The Mississippi Library Commission ordered the deletion of two research collections that might violate state law, a March 31 internal memo obtained by Mississippi Today shows. One of the now deleted research collections focused on “race relations” and the other on “gender studies.”

So what?

I find it interesting that in a state holding down the 50th spot in academic slickness assumes that its students will be reading research on these topics or any topics for that matter.

I did a very brief stint as a teacher. In fact, I invested one year teaching in a quite challenging high school environment about 100 miles south of Chicago. If my students read anything, I was quite happy. I suppose today that I would be terminated because I used the Sunday comics, gas station credit card application forms, job applications for the local Hunt’s Drive In, and a wide range of printed matter. My goal was to provide reading material that was different from the standard text book, a text book I used when I was in high school years before I showed up at my teaching job.

The goal is to get students reading. Today, I assume that removing books and research material is more informed than what I did.

Several observations:

  1. Taking steps to prevent reading is different from how I would approach the question, “What should be in the school library?”
  2. The message sent to students who actually learn that books and research materials are being removed from the library seems to me to be, “Hey, don’t read this academic garbage.”
  3. The anti-intellectualism which this removal seems to underscore means that Mississippi is working hard to nail down its number 50 spot.

I am a dinobaby. I am quite thrilled with this fact. I will probably fall over dead with a book in my hands. Remember: I used outside materials to try to engage my students in reading for that one year of high school teaching. I should have been killed when a library stack fell over when I was in grade school.

These types of decisions are going to get the job done for me I think.

Stephen E Arnold, April 9, 2025

AI: Job Harvesting

April 9, 2025

It is a question that keeps many of us up at night. Commonplace ponders, "Will AI Automate Away Your Job?" The answer: Probably, sooner or later. The when depends on the job. Some workers may be lucky enough to reach retirement age before that happens. Writer Jason Hausenloy explains:

"The key idea where the American worker is concerned is that your job is as automatable as the smallest, fully self-contained task is. For example, call center jobs might be (and are!) very vulnerable to automation, as they consist of a day of 10- to 20-minute or so tasks stacked back-to-back. Ditto for many forms of many types of freelancer services, or paralegals drafting contracts, or journalists rewriting articles. Compare this to a CEO who, even in a day broken up into similar 30-minute activities—a meeting, a decision, a public appearance—each required years of experiential context that a machine can’t yet simply replicate. … This pattern repeats across industries: the shorter the time horizon of your core tasks, the greater your automation risk."

See the post for a more detailed example that compares the jobs of a technical support specialist and an IT systems architect.

Naturally, other factors complicate the matter. For example, Hausenloy notes, blue-collar jobs may be safer longer because physical robots are more complex to program than information software. Also, the more data there is on how to do a job, the better equipped algorithms are to mimic it. That is one reason many companies implement tracking software. Yes, it allows them to micromanage workers. And also it gathers data needed to teach an LLM how to do the job. With every keystroke and mouse click, many workers are actively training their replacements.

Ironically, it seems those responsible for unleashing AI on the world may be some of the most replaceable. Schadenfreude, anyone? The article notes:

"The most vulnerable jobs, then, are not those traditionally thought of as threatened by automation—like manufacturing workers or service staff—but the ‘knowledge workers’ once thought to be automation-proof. And most vulnerable of all? The same Silicon Valley engineers and programmers who are building these AI systems. Software engineers whose jobs are based on writing code as discrete, well-documented tasks (often following standardized updates to a central directory) are essentially creating the perfect training data for AI systems to replace them."

In a section titled "Rethinking Work," Hausenloy waxes philosophical on a world in which all of humanity has been fired. Is a universal basic income a viable option? What, besides income, do humans get out of their careers? In what new ways will we address those needs? See the write-up for those thought exercises. Meanwhile, if you do want to remain employed as long as possible, try to make your job depend less on simple, repetitive tasks and more on human connection, experience, and judgement. With luck, you may just reach retirement before AI renders you obsolete.

Cynthia Murrell, April 9, 2025

Programmers? Just the Top Code Wizards Needed. Sorry.

April 8, 2025

dino orange_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbNo AI. Just a dinobaby sharing an observation about younger managers and their innocence.

Microsoft has some interesting ideas about smart software and writing “code.” To sum it up, consider another profession.

Microsoft CTO Predicts AI Will Generate 95% of Code by 2030” reports:

Developers’ roles will shift toward orchestrating AI-driven workflows and solving complex problems.

I think this means that instead of figuring out how to make something happen, one will perform the higher level mental work. The “script” comes out of the smart software.

The write up says:

“It doesn’t mean that the AI is doing the software engineering job … authorship is still going to be human,” Scott explained. “It creates another layer of abstraction [as] we go from being an input master (programming languages) to a prompt master (AI orchestrator).” He doesn’t believe AI will replace developers, but it will fundamentally change their workflows. Instead of painstakingly writing every line of code, engineers will increasingly rely on AI tools to generate code based on prompts and instructions. In this new paradigm, developers will focus on guiding AI systems rather than programming computers manually. By articulating their needs through prompts, engineers will allow AI to handle much of the repetitive work, freeing them to concentrate on higher-level tasks like design and problem-solving.

The idea is good. Does it imply that smart software has reached the end of its current trajectory and will not be able to:

  1. Recognize a problem
  2. Formulate appropriate questions
  3. Obtain via research, experimentation, or Eureka! moments a solution?

The observation by the Microsoft CTO does not seem to consider this question about a trolly line that can follow its tracks.

The article heads off in another direction; specifically, what happens to the costs?

IBM CEO Arvind Krishna’s is quoted as saying:

“If you can produce 30 percent more code with the same number of people, are you going to get more code written or less?” Krishna rhetorically posed, suggesting that increased efficiency would stimulate innovation and market growth rather than job losses.

Where does this leave “coders”?

Several observations:

  • Those in the top one percent of skills are in good shape. The other 99 percent may want to consider different paths to a bright, fulfilling future
  • Money, not quality, is going to become more important
  • Inexperienced “coders” may find themselves looking for ways to get skills at the same time unneeded “coders” are trying to reskill.

It is no surprise that CNET reported, “The public is particularly concerned about job losses. AI experts are more optimistic.”

Net net: Smart software, good or bad, is going to reshape work in a big chunk of the workforce. Are schools preparing students for this shift? Are there government programs in place to assist older workers? As a dinobaby, it seems the answer is not far to seek.

Stephen E Arnold, April 8, 2025

HP and Dead Printers: Hey, Okay, We Will Not Pay

April 8, 2025

HP found an effective way to ensure those who buy its printers also buy its pricy ink: Firmware updates that bricked the printers if a competitor’s cartridge was installed. Not all customers appreciated the ingenuity. Ars Technica reports, "HP Avoids Monetary Damages Over Bricked Printers in Class-Action Settlement." Reporter Scharon Harding writes:

"In December 2020, Mobile Emergency Housing Corp. and a company called Performance Automotive & Tire Center filed a class-action complaint against HP [PDF], alleging that the company ‘wrongfully compels users of its printers to buy and use only HP ink and toner supplies by transmitting firmware updates without authorization to HP printers over the Internet that lock out its competitors’ ink and toner supply cartridges.’ The complaint centered on a firmware update issued in November 2020; it sought a court ruling that HP’s actions broke the law, an injunction against the firmware updates, and monetary and punitive damages. ‘HP’s firmware "updates" act as malware—adding, deleting or altering code, diminishing the capabilities of HP printers, and rendering the competitors’ supply cartridges incompatible with HP printers,’ the 2020 complaint reads."

Yikes. The name HP gave this practice is almost Orwellian. We learn:

"HP calls using updates to prevent printers from using third-party ink and toner Dynamic Security. The term aims to brand the device bricking as a security measure. In recent years, HP has continued pushing this claim, despite security experts that Ars has spoken with agreeing that there’s virtually zero reason for printer users to worry about getting hacked through ink."

No kidding. After nearly four years of litigation, the parties reached a settlement. HP does not admit any wrongdoing and will not pay monetary relief to affected customers. It must, however, let users decline similar updates; well, those who own a few particular models, anyway. It will also put disclaimers about Dynamic Security on product pages. Because adding a couple lines to the fine print will surely do the trick.

Harding notes that, though this settlement does not include monetary restitution, other decisions have. Those few million dollars do not seem to have influenced HP to abolish the practice, however.

Cynthia Murrell, April 8, 2025

Amazon Takes the First Step Toward Moby Dickdom

April 7, 2025

dino orange_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumbNo AI. Just a dinobaby sharing an observation about younger managers and their innocence.

This Engadget article does not predict the future. “Amazon Will Use AI to Generate Recaps for Book Series on the Kindle” reports:

Amazon’s new feature could make it easier to get into the latest release in a series, especially if it’s been some time since you’ve read the previous books. The new Recaps feature is part of the latest software update for the Kindle, and the company compares it to “Previously on…” segments you can watch for TV shows. Amazon announced Recaps in a blog post, where it said that you can get access to it once you receive the software update over the air or after you download and install it from Amazon’s website. Amazon didn’t talk about the technology behind the feature in its post, but a spokesperson has confirmed to TechCrunch that the recaps will be AI generated.

You may know a person who majored in American or English literature. Here’s a question you could pose:

Do those novels by a successful author follow a pattern; that is, repeatable elements and a formula?

My hunch is that authors who have written a series of books have a recipe. The idea is, “If it makes money, do it again.” In the event that you could ask Nora Roberts or commune with Billy Shakespeare, did their publishers ask, “Could you produce another one of those for us? We have a new advance policy.” When my Internet 2000: The Path to the Total Network made money in 1994, I used the approach, tone, and research method for my subsequent monographs. Why? People paid to read or flip through the collected information presented my way. I admit I that combined luck, what I learned at a blue chip consulting firm, and inputs from people who had written successful non-fiction “reports.” My new monograph — The Telegram Labyrinth — follows this blueprint. Just ask my son, and he will say, “My dad has a template and fills in the blanks.”

If a dinobaby can do it, what about flawed smart software?

Chase down a person who teaches creative writing, preferably in a pastoral setting. Ask that person, “Do successful authors of series follow a pattern?”

Here’s what I think is likely to happen at Amazon. Remember. I have zero knowledge about the inner workings of the Bezos bulldozer. I inhale its fumes like many other people. Also, Engadget doesn’t get near this idea. This is a dinobaby opinion.

Amazon will train its smart software to write summaries. Then someone at Amazon will ask the smart software to generate a 5,000 word short story in the style of Nora Roberts or some other money spinner. If the story is okay, then the Amazonian with a desire to shift gears says, “Can you take this short story and expand it to a 200,000 word novel, using the patterns, motifs, and rhetorical techniques of the series of novels by Nora, Mark, or whoever.

Guess what?

Amazon now has an “original” novel which can be marketed as an Amazon test, a special to honor whomever, or experiment. If Prime members or the curious click a lot, that Amazon employee has a new business to propose to the big bulldozer driver.

How likely is this scenario? My instinct is that there is a 99 percent probability that an individual at Amazon or the firm from which Amazon is licensing its smart software has or will do this.

How likely is it that Amazon will sell these books to the specific audience known to consume the confections of Nora and Mark or whoever? I think the likelihood is close to 80 percent. The barriers are:

  1. Bad optics among publishers, many of which are not pals of fume spouting bulldozers in the few remaining bookstores
  2. Legal issues because both publishers and authors will grouse and take legal action. The method mostly worked when Google was scanning everything from timetables of 19th century trains in England to books just unwrapped for the romance novel crowd
  3. Management disorganization. Yep, Amazon is suffering the organization dysfunction syndrome just like other technology marvels
  4. The outputs lack the human touch. The project gets put on ice until OpenAI, Anthropic, or whatever comes along and does a better job and probably for fewer computing resources which means more profit.

What’s important is that this first step is now public and underway.

Engadget says, “Use it at your own risk.” Whose risk may I ask?

Stephen E Arnold, April 7, 2025

AI May Fizzle and the New York Times Is Thrilled

April 7, 2025

dino orangeYep, a dinobaby blog post. No smart software required.

I read “The Tech Fantasy That Powers A.I. Is Running on Fumes.” Is this a gleeful headline or not. Not even 10 days after the Italian “all AI” newspaper found itself the butt of merciless humor, the NYT is going for the jugular.

The write up opines:

  • “Midtech” — tech but not really
  • “Silly” — Showing little thought or judgment
  • “Academics” — Ivory tower dwellers, not real journalists and thinkers

Here’s a quote from a person who obviously does not like self check outs:

The economists Daron Acemoglu and Pascual Restrepo call these kinds of technological fizzles “so-so” technologies. They change some jobs. They’re kind of nifty for a while. Eventually they become background noise or are flat-out annoying, say, when you’re bagging two weeks’ worth of your own groceries.

And now the finale:

But A.I. is a parasite. It attaches itself to a robust learning ecosystem and speeds up some parts of the decision process. The parasite and the host can peacefully coexist as long as the parasite does not starve its host. The political problem with A.I.’s hype is that its most compelling use case is starving the host — fewer teachers, fewer degrees, fewer workers, fewer healthy information environments.

My thought is that the “real” journalists at the NYT hope that AI fails. Most routine stories can be handled by smart software. Sure, there are errors. But looking at a couple of versions of the same event is close enough for horse shoes.

The writing is on the wall of the bean counters’ offices: Reduce costs. Translation: Some “real” journalists can try to get a job as a big time consultant. Oh, strike that. Outfits that sell brains are replacing flakey MBAs with smart software. Well, there is PR and marketing. Oh, oh, strike that tool. Telegram’s little engines of user controlled smart software can automate ads. Will other ad outfits follow Telegram’s lead? Absolutely.

Yikes. It won’t be long before some “real” journalists will have an opportunity to write their version of:

  • Du côté de chez Swann
  • À l’ombre des jeunes filles en fleurs
  • Le Côté de Guermantes
  • Sodome et Gomorrhe
  • La Prisonnière
  • Albertine disparue (also published as La Fugitive)
  • Le Temps retrouvé

Which one will evoke the smell of the newsroom?

Stephen E Arnold, April 7, 2025

« Previous PageNext Page »

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta