The Google Virtual Private Network Is Sufficiently Unprivate So Google Can Show You Ads
October 20, 2022
Ads are as American as apple pie for Internet users. Ads allow companies and smaller businesses to make a profit from their products and services. Usually, ad revenues help keep products and services free. Large tech companies, like Google, Apple, Amazon, and Facebook, have other income streams than ads, so ad blockers are not harming their bottom lines. Google, however, is counting every red cent, because they are pulling the plug on VPN ad blockers says Blokada: “Google Cracks Down On VPN Based Adblockers.”
Under the guise of improving performance and security, Google has revamped its developer policy for the Play Store. The changes go into effect throughout the remainder of 2022. Changes to VPN ad blockers take effect in November 2022:
“One of the main policy changes concerns the VPN Service which will take effect on November 1, 2022: Google claims to be cracking down on apps that are using the VPN service to track user data or rerouting user traffic to earn money through ads. However, these policy changes also apply to apps that use the service to filter traffic locally on the device. Apps such as Blokada v5 and Duck Duck Go. Specifically the policy does not allow for ‘Manipulating ads that can impact apps monetization’.”
Blokada is a popular ad blocked for mobile and VPN services. The new Google Play Store policy sounds like it would hurt Blokada users, but its developers found a way to circumvent it. Blokada no longer requires a local VPN, instead, it uses cloud filtering. The advantage to cloud filtering, other than not violating Google policy, is it does not affect network speed, device speed, or battery life.
Other VPN users will be viewing ads, lots of ads, if they do not find their own Play Store policy loophole. Google will probably find a way to prevent these loopholes because innovative Google has improved the GoTo, Overture, and Yahoo systems, of course.
Whitney Grace, October 20, 2022
Am I Reading the CNN Critique of Big Tech Correctly?
October 18, 2022
I read “With Product Innovation Lagging, Silicon Valley Bets on a Fresh Coat of Paint.” The article discusses some familiar companies, founded by wizards who became cultural icons of US innovation. The write up states:
The emphasis on a new color palette for devices isn’t unique to Google. As tech companies showed off their latest smartphones, tablets and laptops at splashy press events over the last two months, many of the products had only limited changes on the outside but boasted elaborately named color options.
Does this mean that the technology of Silicon Valley has become similar to paint chips at Home Depot? Have the engineers been repurposed as interior decorators? Is Silicon Valley pointing to recalibrating Silicon Valley as a fashion forward outfit with “taste” becoming more important than delivering compelling products. I am thinking about the sad empty place which may be a metaphor for Mr. Zuckerberg’s vision of the future — a future with attractive colors no doubt.
The write up identifies some of the innovations in the article; for example:
- Seafoam
- Lemongrass
- Snows
- Sapphire
- Forest
- Metal
- Sandstone
- Alpine
- Bora purple
The write up points out:
But just as basic black, white, gray and silver are the top colors in the automobile industry, these colors tend to resonate most with smartphone owners, according to Peggy Van Allen, a color anthropologist for the Color Marketing Group.
Does this mean that Silicon Valley engineer decorators are living in a color bubble just as they existed in crazy features and projects no one understood or wanted. What was the color of Google Glass? What is the color of the Zuck’s metaverse? What’s the tint of Microsoft security? Here’s my answer: Failure gray maybe?
Net net: Engineer decorators, in my opinion, sums up where Silicon Valley’s innovation finds inspiration. Is that what “real news” thinks about the touchstone for technology gods? Paint chip people selling subscriptions?
Stephen E Arnold, October 18, 2022
Tor Friendly ISP Takes a Break
October 17, 2022
I usually do not post “real news.” I am making an exception today because two Tor friendly ISPs have taken a break. Usually when law enforcement takes down a Dark Web centric outfit, there are news releases, news stories, and reports about sentencing (if the “owners” are convicted).
Our routine check of the 24 Tor friendly ISPs we track, Ablative have either “paused” sign ups or disappeared. We are working to track down the individuals who have played a role in these companies. That’s not the easiest task for my team. There are some nifty obfuscation techniques available and creating personas (what some call sock puppets) is easy. Plus, the technique of paying a person in need of cash to set up an account without revealing how that account will be used is easier than ever. (Just check out the folks using free WiFi at a public library, a coffee shop near a university or methadone clinic, or individuals loitering near a food disbursement point.
Stephen E Arnold, October 18, 2022
Metazuck: An All Too Common Response in Silicon Valley Land
October 17, 2022
“How TikTok Ate the Internet” is a business school write up which contains some interesting data; for example:
The web’s most popular app [TikTok] has reshaped American culture, hypnotized the world and sparked a battle between two global superpowers…TikTok’s website was visited last year more often than Google. No app has grown faster past a billion users, and more than 100 million of them are in the United States, roughly a third of the country. The average American viewer watches TikTok for 80 minutes a day — more than the time spent on Facebook and Instagram, combined.
I think this means is that TikTok is the next big thing… after almost a decade in the gloomy bedrooms of teens.
Fortune Magazine explains “Mark Zuckerberg admits he missed a social networking trend that led to the TikTok boom.” How is this possible? Easy. Facebook or the Zuckbook just missed the next big thing. Money and legal woes can distract I suppose.
Now the Zucker wants to catch up. One article has the interesting title “Meta Has Burned $15 billion Trying to Build the Metaverse — And Nobody’s Saying Exactly Where the Money Went.” The write up focuses on using money to leap frog the next big thing. Okay, that may work, but I don’t think tech gurus on the way down can buy their way back up.
What’s my view of the Zucker’s situation? Think about a person watching a hauspex chop out a goat’s liver. The spectacle and the solemnity of the event fuels the hope that the desired outcome will be foretold. Sure it is.
In terms of Silicon Valley, the idea is that money divines the future. How does one deal with TikTok and a decided lack of enthusiasm for spending time in a cartoon without legs or a way to send a text?
Money.
Let’s take a helicopter to 3,000 feet and check out the lay of the Silicon Valley method.
- Spending money to “apply” technology is the best way to fix a problem. Is the logic, “Hey, this worked for the iPhone, and it will work in the TikTok situation.”
- The mental frame for solving problems ignores soft factors like users who want and need to use the TikTok content experience. Social graphs and knock off service. Thank you, no.
- The cloud of misperception is “a certain blindness” which is touchingly centered in Silicon Valley it seems from my helicopter.
Is the problem China and super algorithms?
First, TikTok’s method is not that sophisticated based on our examination of the system. Sure, the surveillance stuff is good, but that’s old hat in the intelware game. Everyone attributes technological wizardry to TikTok. Some influence? Sure. But the drip of digital anesthesia is easier and more fun when administered in the somewhat negative post Covid world.
Second, the Chinese government is not exactly the world’s most progressive institution. Bureaucrats recognized an opportunity to inject content and took it.
Third, the Silicon Valley mindset arrived late and the high speed train had departed the station. Buying a train does not deliver a way to catch up. What about building a rocket ship?
Net net: Long shot.
Stephen E Arnold, October 17, 2022
Silicon Valley Follies: Fodder for a Video Series
October 14, 2022
Quite an interesting few days.
First, Microsoft demonstrated “meta” thinking in two ways. The friendly company bonded with the real Meta (the Zuckbook in my lingo) to put the legless electronic game thing in Teams. Yeah, cool. Read more in “Meta Platforms: Microsoft Partnership and New VR/AR Device.” The Softies announced a consulting chestnut. Microsoft moved from selling Word (a standalone app), to flogging Office (a bundle of apps which contained Word), and now to Office 365 (a subscription to a collection of apps). That in consultant speak is “popping up a level” or a meta-move (not to be confused with Zuck think, please). Read more about this thinking and branding play in “Microsoft Office Will Be Replaced by Microsoft 365 As Part of Its Ongoing Refresh.”
A second interesting development was Google’s illustration of tightly integrated coordination among its operating units. The company killed Stadia, the earth shaking online gaming platform. You can read about one incisive strategic move in “When Stadia Dies, It’s Taking Its Platform-Exclusive Game Outcasters with It.” Then Google announced Chromebooks set up for online gaming.” You can read about this easy-to-understand complement to the termination of Stadia in “Google Introduces Chromebooks Geared for Cloud Gaming.” Definitely a clever chess move.
But the highlight for me was management acumen at Amazon and Google. “Google Datacenter Contractors Claim Retaliation for Talking Workers’ Rights” reports:
Amazon has also been fending off attempts by its workers to unionize. It stands accused of harassing union organizers, according to a consolidated complaint filed earlier this month for which it was due to lodge a response last week. The workers allege that in the months before the failed unionization attempt at its LDJ5 warehouse on Staten Island in May, they were harassed for displaying pro-union material in their downtime, among other things. Amazon told us at the time: “These allegations are completely without merit and we look forward to showing that through the process.”
And the Google followed what appears to be a similar management playbook. The article says:
The union is claiming that when Allied Universal was brought in as a replacement for a previous security contractor for Google Data Centers, workers were allegedly told they were no longer entitled to the minimum standard of benefits Google guarantees for all extended workers. Google uses the term “extended workforce” to refer to contractors, contract workers, and independent companies who work for the search giant.
True or false? Who knows. I enjoy the discussion of these management-staff and management-contractor interactions. Slick stuff.
The spirit of the science club (the metaverse avatars will have legs soon) and the thirst for power (monopolies anyone?) are alive and well. Despite the downturn in Silicon Valley’s fortunes, the spirit of the mythical land of unicorns is thriving.
Stephen E Arnold, October 14, 2022
Twitter: Gee, It Is Great Just Broken Like Humpty Dumpty
October 14, 2022
I read “Elon Musk Can’t Fix Twitter Because No One Can.” Fascinating. A service much-loved by “real” journalists, pundits, LinkedIn haters, and content savvy glitterati is broken. When I see the word “broken,” I think about Humpty Dumpty, the anthropomorphic gamete.
The “fail whale” broken? Isn’t that one of the cute error messages the “tweeter” — a word coined by a brilliant elected official in the US, I believe — was offline.
The write up asks:
Meanwhile. Here’s a thought experiment: What happens if Twitter goes offline tomorrow, for good?
I know my answer. Ready? Nothing. For those who need to output content, there are numerous options; for example, Reddit, HackerNews, free blogs, TikTok, and my personal fave, Substack-like services. These are ideal for outputters: A publishing medium without an editor! For those with big bucks, a motivated quasi expert can create a social media start up or just download some open source software and go, go, go.
The write up includes some data; for example:
just 23 percent of American teens say they use the service now, down from 33 percent in 2014.
I wonder what percentage of Vox-type professionals rely on Twitter? Possible more than the dismal teen user percentage I would guess.
The write up explains what Twitter is:
Twitter is simply the top layer of social media, mainly because it’s quite searchable, especially compared to TikTok (for now). It’s a guide to the rest of the internet, not a hangout.
Why have some tweeters abandoned the Twitter outputter?
Too much hassle, not enough upside.
Interesting. How will the Silicon Valley type “real” news content reach “users”?
Why not start a subscription-only information service? Those work really well because the endnote to this impassioned analysis of the tweeter says this:
Now is not the time for paywalls. Now is the time to point out what’s hidden in plain sight (for instance, the hundreds of election deniers on ballots across the country), clearly explain the answers to voters’ questions, and give people the tools they need to be active participants in America’s democracy. Reader gifts help keep our well-sourced, research-driven explanatory journalism free for everyone. By the end of September, we’re aiming to add 5,000 new financial contributors to our community of Vox supporters. Will you help us reach our goal by making a gift today?
Yep, begging for dollars in a message longer than many tweets.
Stephen E Arnold, October 15, 2022
China Plans to Promote, and Regulate, Digital Humans
October 14, 2022
We learn from Rest of World that “Beijing Will Regulate ‘Digital Humans’ in the Metaverse and Beyond.” Because of course it will. The proclamation was issued in the government’s four-year Action Plan, a document that indicates to businesses what it expects of them in the near future. The Chinese seem quite taken with “digital humans,” from virtual idols to game avatars, and President Xi Jinping is eager to capitalize on the trend. Reporter Meaghan Tobin specifies:
“The plan envisions huge growth in the next few years, projecting that by 2025, revenue will hit $7.3 billion in the capital city alone — and expecting that virtual humans will assist with online banking, shopping, and travel services within the next few years.”
Though the growing virtual idol industry has a real problem with overworked employees, that is not a focus of the plan. It has two main priorities: One, naturally, is to promote the “healthy and orderly development of society.” Aka censorship. The other is the security of personal information. That sounds like a good thing—until one considers the government seeks to secure this data for its own purposes. Protecting users from criminals may be just a side benefit. Citing Hanyu Liu, an analysis of China’s gaming and metaverse industries, Tobin continues:
“The plan also signals that Beijing will take a more active role in handling the personal data generated by these platforms. Some of the directives outlined in the plan require any user-facing aspect of the digital human industry to be subject to rules that protect information about and generated by platform users, while also treating user data as a resource to be traded on the country’s new data exchanges. As is the case on almost all user-facing tech platforms in China today, Liu noted, any users of metaverse or gaming platforms that could be considered part of the digital human industry will likely be required to tie their online personas to their real-life identification documents.”
So we should not expect to see a wave of virtual protestors in China any time soon. According to Qiheng Chen, who has analyzed China’s tech policies, this push is an effort to garner talent and funds that will support its larger goal—making the country more self-sufficient in related industries like semiconductors and artificial intelligence. Those do sound a bit more strategic than simply embracing the whimsy of digital pop stars.
Cynthia Murrell, October 14, 2022
Google Pixel: A Microcosm of the Company Itself
October 13, 2022
The reliable technology cheer squad tries to do one thing and delivers another. Let me explain my perception. I read “Why Google Pixels Aren’t As Popular As iPhones and Samsung Galaxy Phones.” The article tries quite hard to be an objective discussion of Google losing out in the hardware game.
The article describes several issues; to wit:
- Early missteps with distribution
- Silicon Valley supporters’ efforts fall short as Google played catch up
- Hardware was just okay
- Cameras were behind the cats in Cupertino’s gizmos
- Google lacked and lacks a “strong identity”
The write up focuses on Google’s mobile efforts. However, these issues — strategic and tactical failures — are those which have plagued many of Alphabet’s efforts. There’s the wonderful “solving death” effort, the amusing creation of the glasshole meme, and the total craziness of Google Maps in its present incarnation.
What’s the point? We have an outfit which was greatly influenced by Yahoo, GoTo, and Overture and these firms’ approach to online advertising. We have an acquired product YouTube which challenges the GDP of many nations with its engineering costs, bandwidth costs, legal costs, and content moderation (such as it is) costs. We have a management approach which if it were not harmful to careers of those who disagree with senior management like something out of a Marx Brothers’ film.
Why aren’t Pixel popular? For starters, the phone is in the Google fractal. Each iteration mirrors the initial algorithm’s starting point. Clever? You bet. The cheerleaders have expressed a core truth: Gimme a C, gimme an H, gimme an A, gimme an O, gimme an S. What’s it spell? Chaos. Rah Rah Rah.
Stephen E Arnold, October 13, 2022
Ford Motors of Pinto Fame Wants an App to Prevent Death
October 13, 2022
Smart cars, such as Tesla, are supposed to propel humanity into the future and revolutionize travel. Because smart car technology is still in its infancy, the vehicles experience many hiccups. Gizmodo explains how one car manufacturer is trying to prevent human deaths with an app: “Ford Hopes People Will Download An App To Avoid Being Hit By Its Cars.”
Since many cars are equipped with Bluetooth, Ford figured that the technology could protect pedestrians, animals, cyclists, etc. from a collision. Ford is designing an app that alerts to drivers to possible targets…er…obstructions with Bluetooth Low Energy technology. The downside is that it only works for those using the app.
People who download the app on their mobile devices would alert drivers of Ford vehicles to their presence. The driver who be alerted via Ford’s Sync infotainment system and would be part of the manufacturer’s existing advanced driver assistance system. The driving assistance system intervenes when a driver fails to notice obstacles.
There is a growing amount of deaths related to traffic accidents. A large contributing factor is the popularity of large trucks and SUVs; Ford sells more of these cars than any US automaker.
There is a logical downside:
“However, as a report from Engadget first pointed out, it’s hard to imagine that something like Ford’s app will be able to solve the problem of increasing pedestrian mortality. How many people will be willing to download yet another location-tracking app, for a purpose that could and should be better addressed by policy and infrastructure changes?”
It could also beg the question that Ford could set the smart car technology to purposely crash into non-Ford drivers and/or environmentalists. Or Ford could stop making overly large vehicles…just a thought.
Whitney Grace, October 13, 2022
Cyber Security: The Stew Is Stirred
October 12, 2022
Cyber security, in my opinion, is often an oxymoron. Cyber issues go up; cyber vendors’ marketing clicks up a notch. The companies with cyber security issues keeps pace. Who wins this cat-and-mouse ménage a trois? The answer is the back actors and the stakeholders in the cyber security vendors with the best marketing.
Now the game is changing from cyber roulette, which has been mostly unwinnable to digital poker.
Here’s how the new game works if the information in “With Security Revenue Surging, CrowdStrike Wants to Be a Broader Enterprise IT Player” is on the money. I have to keep reminding myself that if there is cheating in competitive fishing, chess, and poker, there might be some Fancy Dancing at the cyber security hoe down.
The write up points out that CrowdStrike, a cyber security vendor, wants to pull a “meta” play; that is, the company’s management team wants to pop up a level. The idea is that cyber security is a platform. The “platform” concept means that other products and services should and will plug into the core system. Think of an oil rig which supports the drill, the pumps, spare parts, and the mess hall. Everyone has to use the mess hall and other essential facilities.
The article says:
Already one of the biggest names in cybersecurity for the past decade, CrowdStrike now aspires to become a more important player in areas within the wider IT landscape such as data observability and IT operations…
Google and Microsoft are outfits which may have to respond to the CrowdStrike “pop up a level” tactic. Google’s full page ads in the dead tree version of the Wall Street Journal and Microsoft’s on-going security laugh parade may not be enough to prevent CrowdStrike from:
- Contacting big companies victimized by lousy security provided by some competitors (Hello, Microsoft client. Did you know….)
- Getting a group of executives hurt in the bonus department by soaring cyber security costs
- Closing deals which automatically cut into both the big competitors’ and the small providers’ deals with these important clients.
The write up cites a mid tier consulting firm as a source of high value “proof” of the CrowdStrike concept. The write up offers this:
IDC figures have shown CrowdStrike in the lead on endpoint security market share, with 12.6% of the market in 2021, compared to 11.2% for Microsoft. CrowdStrike’s growth of 68% in the market last year, however, was surpassed by Microsoft’s growth of nearly 82%, according to the IDC figures.
CrowdStrike’s approach is to pitch a “single agent architecture.” Is this accurate? Sure, it’s marketing, and marketing matters.
Our research suggests that cyber security remains a “reaction” game. Something happens or a new gaffe is exploited, and the cyber security vendors react. The bad actors then move on. The result is that billions in revenue are generated for cyber security vendors who sell solutions after something has been breached.
Is there an end to this weird escalation? Possibly but that would require better engineering from the git go, government regulations for vendors whose solutions are not secure, and stronger enforcement action at the point of distribution. (Yes, ISPs and network providers, I am talking about you.)
Net net: Cyber security will become a market sector to watch. Some darned creative marketing will be on display. Meanwhile as the English majors write copy, the bad actors will be exploiting old and new loopholes.
Stephen E Arnold, October 12, 2022
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
