Google Stretches Its AI Wings
December 19, 2016
Google has been very busy launching AI solutions. For example, ReCode tells us, “Pow! Bang! Google Uses Its AI to Bring Visual Punch to Digital Comic Books,” while the New Atlas reports, “DeepMind AI Slashes Cooling Costs at Google’s Data Centers.” Making comic books easier to read is nice, and reducing electric consumption is even better. We would be happy, though, to finally see more relevant search results; perhaps Google will tackle that side project soon.
Recode’s Mark Bergen describes Google’s comic-book enhancement tool, called Bubble Zoom:
The latest [AI] insertion is a neat visual trick to make it easier to read comic books within the Google Play Books app. Unfurled at Comic-Con International, it’s called Bubble Zoom and does just that — zooms in on text bubbles in comics with one touch. Last fall, Google introduced new mobile formats for digital comics, an attempt to get more comics readers, a devotee-heavy group, spending time and money within Google’s digital media store.
That could work. Meanwhile, Google is certainly seeing financial benefits from its AI-enhanced data center cooling project. Michael Irving at the New Atlas explains:
Now, Google has set its DeepMind system loose on its massive data centers, and drastically cut the cost of cooling these facilities in the process. Running Gmail, YouTube, and the all-knowing Google Search guzzles a tremendous amount of power, and while Google has invested heavily in making its servers, cooling systems and energy sources as efficient and green as possible, there’s always room for improvement. Especially when the industrial-scale cooling systems are difficult to run efficiently, given the complex interactions that occur between equipment, environment and staff in a data center. To account for all those factors that a human operator or traditional formula-based engineering might miss, the team put DeepMind to work on the problem, and the result was a drastic reduction in power consumption for the center’s cooling systems.
The article goes on to describe how the difference was measured, using the PUE metric and the record-breaking results they achieved. Naturally, Google expects to apply this successful tool throughout their buildings. We’re told they also plan to share the methodology with other organizations, so they can reduce their energy consumption, too. No word yet on how they plan to monetize that initiative.
Cynthia Murrell, December 19, 2016
Yahoo Data Value
December 18, 2016
I read “Hacked Yahoo Data Worth $300,000 on the Dark Web.” The Yahoot fumbled bumbled its way to losing more passwords. I have seen numbers ranging from 300 million, 500 million, and one billion. The answer to the question is allegedly $300,000. Seems to work out to about $0.0003. That strikes me as close to the credibility of the Yahoot management team. Those Xoogler led wizards know how to deliver “value.” Yahoo. It’s a hoot. Change that yodel to “yahooooot.”
Stephen E Arnold, December 18, 1016
Trump and Tech: A Question and My Answer
December 18, 2016
I read “So What Attracted Tech Bosses to the Billionaire President-Elect Donald Trump?” The several hundred word write up tackles an obvious question. There is one answer:
Power.
Why use so many words to answer the question? My thoughts:
- Author is paid to produce a certain number of words. A one word real journalistic write up is not acceptable.
- Author wants to trot out some cute Trumpies; for example, trumpelthinskin
- Author wants to amplify the reasons to include greed and money.
Nope. Power. When I was a wee lad, I lived in Washington, DC. When I was a bit older I was detailed to “assist” the elected official who was the chair of the then Joint Committee on Atomic Energy. A bit later I fumbled around on a White House job. Some call it Potomac fever.
Take it from me: Power. One word. The answer. I did like the begging for dollars tack on too.
Stephen E Arnold, December 18, 2016
Gallup Survey Shows American Faith in Almost All Institutions Waning Except Military
December 17, 2016
The article on The Washington Examiner titled Fishwrap: Confidence in Newspapers, TV News Hits Bottom relays a Gallup survey that shows Americans trust in media slipping to a new low. The focus of the survey was general loss of confidence in various institutions such as churches, banks, big business, and Congress. The article translates the findings,
Overall, said Gallup’s analysis, “Confidence in banks — which took a hit amid the bursting housing bubble in 2007 and 2008, and dropped further after the ensuing financial crisis — fell the most, plunging from 49% in 2006 to 27% now. Confidence in organized religion, which has felt the effects of the scandals enveloping the Catholic Church, dropped from 52% to 41%, one point below last year’s previous low of 42%.
TV news, print news, and Congress saw the greatest falls of about 10%, perhaps unsurprisingly given the lackluster diplomatic skills of our current Congress and the outright failure of the media to properly vet and address the presumptive Republican nominee. Interestingly, the scandals involving General Petraeus as well as those surrounding the military’s failure to manage sexual assault of its female members over the last few years have done nothing to diminish that institution in the eyes of the public. It stands solid and unshakeable at 73%.
Chelsea Kerwin, December 17, 2016
A Crisis of Confidence
December 14, 2016
I remember a time, long ago, when my family was confident that newspapers and TV reporters were telling us most of the objective facts most of the time. We also had faith that, though flawed human beings, most representatives in Congress were honestly working hard for (what they saw as) positive change. Such confidence, it seems, has gone the way of pet rocks and parachute pants. The Washington Examiner reports, “Fishwrap: Confidence in Newspapers, TV News Hits Bottom.” The brief write-up gives the highlights of a recent Gallup survey. Writer Paul Bedard tells us:
Gallup found that just 20 percent have confidence in newspapers, a 10-point drop in 10 years. TV news saw an identical 10-point drop, from 31 percent to 21 percent. But it could be worse. Of all the institutions Gallup surveyed on, Congress is at the bottom, with just 9 percent having confidence in America’s elected leaders, a finding that is clearly impacting the direction and tone of the 2016 elections. And Americans aren’t putting their faith in religion. Gallup found that confidence in organized religion dropped below 50 percent, to an all-time low of 41 percent.
Last decade’s financial crisis, the brunt of which many are still feeling, has prompted us to also lose faith in our banks (confidence dropped from 49 percent in 2006 to just 27 percent this year). There is one institution in which Americans still place our confidence—the military. Some 73 percent of are confident of that institution, a level that has been constant over the last decade. Could that have anything to do with the outsized share of tax revenue that segment consistently rakes in? Nah, that can’t be it.
Cynthia Murrell, December 14, 2016
Alphabet Google: Cutbacks in Translation Will Not Change the Business Climate for Alphabet
December 10, 2016
The Alphabet Google thing is twitching its Godzilla like tail again. This time, the effect is more noticeable than the cancellation of Web Accelerator or Orkut. Googzilla has neutered its free online translation service. Of course, I assume the information in “Google Translate Now Has a 5,000 Character Limit.” Remember the good old days of November 2016 when Google announced an improvement in its translation service. Well, lucky are we that the entire service has not be killed off.
The write up I scanned reported:
there is a small counter at the bottom right corner of the text box that counts down the characters as you type them. This means that the maximum number of characters allowed per translation is set at 5,000.
How much text is 5,000 characters? That works out to about 2.15 pages of text in 12 point Times Roman on a default Word page.
What does one do if more text has to be translated? Well, translate in segments, silly.
I have noticed that when feeding Google Translate complex pages in non Roman languages, the Google Translate system was taking longer and returning truncated translations. Now the size limit is enforced and one sees a counter for text like this:
I have a number of translation tools, so the loss of the Google service is no biggie here in Harrod’s Creek. I did give this shift a bit of thought. I have some ideas about why this change has been made.
First, the new financial discipline in effect at Google is going to curtail some services which are not used by large numbers of Google “customers.” I know that amidst that trillion plus searches run on Google each year, a tiny fraction rely need online translations. It is, therefore, logical to allocate computational resources to other activities. The good old days of spending freely to support less popular services is over due to cost controls. Let’s face it. The shift to mobile, the crazy moon shots, and ill fated ventures like Google Fiber don’t produce big bucks. Logical. Go with ad spending, not feel good spending.
Second, the Alphabet Google tips its hand when it kills off products and services like the Google Search Appliance. There is no future in some services. That means that the hassle of charging people to use Translate is not going to generate sufficient money to offset the erosion in the core business of ad sales. The shift to mobile puts more pressure on Google’s only money making business capable of supporting the Alphabet Google system. The costs of slipstreaming ads into Translate is not going to produce enough money to justify the investment. Who at Google wants to run an ad service delivering English to Ukrainian translations when a bonus depends on getting more Ukrainian pizza ads displayed along side the translation results?
Third, the shift from search on a big desktop device to search on a tiny mobile device is a problem. One can have more than two thirds of the queries in the US and more than 90 percent of the queries in the rest of the world. However, when only one or two ads can be shoehorned into the available screen real estate, that’s an earnings problem for the Google. Right now the revenue pump up is chugging along, but the continued robustness of Amazon, Apple, Facebook, and other online vendors presages more pressure for the Google.
What’s the common thread running through my three “ideas” or “observations”? The answer is a threat to Google ad model which is predicated on the desktop search model so generously influenced by GoTo.com/Overture.com/Yahoo. The only way to keep this dog from getting hit by speeding competitors is to change the kennel set up.
That’s what the shift in the GSA, the thrashing about YouTube, and the crippling of Google Translate signal. The joy ride of the free spending, we can do anything Google is ending. It had to happen. The founders are getting older. The legal hassles are going up. The silly little Facebook thing is now a very big thing chuck full of Xooglers who know how to probe the soft parts of Googzilla.
I am probably wildly off base in my focus on Google and its revenue. Nevertheless, I am willing to go into a part of the undergrowth that some in Harrod’s Creek avoid. The undergrowth, in this case, faces an environmental threat. Google has to find a source of revenue to make up the deltas between revenue from mobile and desktop mobile, tough to control infrastructure cost inflation, and the new product flop to success ratio.
Times are changing. Googzilla is being affected by its environment. Environments can be tough to change. Monocultures can be vulnerable. Very vulnerable.
Stephen E Arnold, December 10, 2016
Technology and Never: A Risky Proposition
December 1, 2016
I love the capitalist tool. Forbes does the content marketing thing with a soupçon of MBA craziness and the legacy of a once proud business publication. The write up which caught my attention is “Never Acquire Technology You Understand.” The premise strikes me as ill advised.
The premise of the article is that a person with money to invest should seek far out, unproven, unknown, and high risk technologies. I highlighted this statement:
due to a lack of market and technology insight, these decisions turn into a white elephant–the corporate equivalent of the Bridge to Nowhere.
Got that? Here’s a picture to help you out.
Note the role of “waiters”. Apparently below “developers” are folks who serve others and survive on tips and the hope a big break will come with the order. “Waiters” are really the patient ones at the bottom of the pile.
The write up dips into the notion of a “robo advisor.” There’s social media too. The bulk of the write up describes the three types of individuals involved in doing big things via financial technology or betting money on technology horses.
What strikes me is the conclusion of the write up:
Unless you truly and deeply understand the needs of your audience, it’s best to be patient and then apply a rational litmus test to determine the personality you will present to the marketplace. If you are not a rational Waiter, you may end up in the Valley of Technology as a loss-leading Acquirer and Developer.
Wow.
The title says, “Buy stuff you don’t understand.” The conclusion says, “Sit tight.”
Forbes’ editors must have a deeper understanding of logic than I do. I thought that the approach of the smart money folks I used to work with followed some slightly different ideas; for example, diversification, allocation of a specific percentage to higher risk investments, and understand what you are dumping money into.
Errors in search and content processing companies are one example. Think of the dozens of investment firms which do not and did not understand the revenue potential of an information access company. In search, for example, a handful of companies have survived and most of the big name firms gen3rated a payoff when the company was sold to another firm. As standalone businesses, most search and content processing companies have not been home runs. The handful of high fliers has captured headlines due to financial improprieties or allegations of fancy dancing.
MBAs like to make money via flips or deals. Understanding a business is often not a prerequisite. Hey, it’s other people’s money. For those with some money, prudence makes sense. If something cannot be understood, the risks might be high. Do MBAs like wiring, side deals, and crazy double talk to get paid to be wizards?
Do dangerous technologies have a downside? Why not invest in fuel pool cleanups and let me know how that works out for you? You can even lend a hand. Oh, wear protective clothing. Some things which people don’t understand can have non financial consequences.
Stephen E Arnold, December 1, 2016
The New Hewlett Packard Enterprise: HP Eeek
November 30, 2016
i read “HPE Posts Mixed Q4 Results.” The main idea in the write up is that HPE squeezed out some profit despite a drop in year on year revenue. I noted one interesting phrase in the write up in the midst of the fancy dancing around the revenue erosion:
In September, HPE said it will “spin-merge” its non-core software assets with Micro Focus, a software company based in the UK, in a transaction worth around $8.8 billion. These moves will enable HPE, Whitman said, to be more nimble, play higher growth margins and have an enhanced financial profile.
I also like the confections worthy of the Food Channel expressed in this statement:
The company’s goal, she [Ms. Whitman, chief cook] said, is to be the industry’s leading provider of hybrid IT built on the secure, next-generation software-defined infrastructure that runs customers’ data centers today, bridges them to multi-cloud environments tomorrow, and powers of the emerging intelligent edge. [Emphasis added to highlight jargon]
Yes, intelligent edge. Yep, the edge of my desk is possibly intelligent? But I love the thought behind “intelligent edge.” Maybe I would tweak the phrase to say “intelligence edge.” But, hey, I am not a manager at an outfit with a history of board floundering, flubbed acquisitions, and selling off assets.
When I read the reports of the HPE financial results I had this thought:
I wonder if HPE’s senior management has properties with the bookings and potential of Dr. Michael Lynch’s DarkTrace.
Dr. Lynch is going one direction: up. HPE is going another: down.
I doubt if the senior management of HPE thinks much about Dr. Lynch’s business acumen. HPE thinks about finding a scapegoat for its own failure in the due diligence process, understanding the search and content processing market, and its management methods.
As I said, just a thought.
Stephen E Arnold, November 30, 2016
Palantir Technologies Snags Another $20 Million
November 28, 2016
I read “Secretive Big Data Firm Palantir Raises $20M in Recent Funding Run: Report.” I learned:
Palantir has quietly raised $20 million in a recent funding run.
The article pointed out that Palantir had previously raised $800 million. The write up added:
Based on the Nov. 23 Form D filing, the date of the first sale for the recent round of funding was Nov 8. Coincidentally, the new United States president Donald Trump was elected on the same day.
I found this statement interest:
Including the latest round of funding, Palantir has raised more than $2 billion to date.
Interesting. By the way, the figures seem to be hefty.
Stephen E Arnold, November 28, 2016
Dawn of Blockchain Technology
November 24, 2016
Blockchain technology though currently powers the Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, soon the technology might find takers in mainstream commercial activities.
Blockgeeks in an in-depth article guide titled What Is Blockchain Technology? A Step-By-Step Guide for Beginners says:
The blockchain is an incorruptible digital ledger of economic transactions that can be programmed to record not just financial transactions but virtually everything of value.
Without getting into how the technology works, it would be interesting to know how and where the revolutionary technology can be utilized. Due to its inherent nature of being incorruptible due to human intervention and non-centralization, blockchain has numerous applications in the field of banking, remittances, shared economy, crowdfunding and many more, the list is just endless.
The technology will be especially helpful for people who transact over the Web and as the article points out:
Goldman Sachs believes that blockchain technology holds great potential especially to optimize clearing and settlements, and could represent global savings of up to $6bn per year.
Governments and commercial establishment, however, are apprehensive about it as blockchain might end their control over a multitude of things. Just because blockchain never stores data at one location. This also is the reason why Bitcoin is yet to gain full acceptance. But, can a driving force like blockchain technology that will empower the actual users can be stopped?
Vishal Ingole, November 24, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
