Google Aims to Get More Precise by Open Sourced Maps
April 13, 2018
Google Maps is the king of direction finding but the king wants to know if it can go further. The already decently accurate system wants to use open sourcing to get a better handle on addresses and businesses you have on your map. We learned about the interesting method for pulling this off from a Tech Radar story, “Finding an Address on Google Maps Becomes Easier with Plus Codes.”
So, what are these miracle open sourced tools?
“Plus Codes are basically an open sourced solution that represents an easy to understand addressing system that works at any part of the world. It allocates address based on dividing the geographical surface into tiny ’tiled areas’, attributing a unique code to each of them.”
Seems like an interesting move by Google. However, we are skeptical about the ability to improve maps through this method. Other open source mapping tools, like OpenStreetMap, have recently come under fire for not being very accurate and turning away users. We already know that Google will have an accuracy edge here, but we simply don’t see the appeal for users overall. Look back in a year or two and this will be in the famous Google Graveyard with Glass and other swing-and-miss ideas.
Patrick Roland, April 13, 2018
When Employees Protest, Management Has to Manage
April 12, 2018
The online information drum has been pounding out messages about the Google employees who don’t want Google to do evil. The issue pivots on the GOOG’s tie up with the US government. The application? Smart software for DoD type challenges.
What if innovation didn’t come down to who had the brightest mind, but who has the biggest collection of data? That’s an interesting thought that is gaining steam in the tech community, especially among venture capitalists. We got a hint of this growing world from the Harvard Business Review article, “Are The Most Innovative Companies Just The Ones With The Most Data?”
According to the story:
“[I]nnovation is founded on data rather than human ideas, the firms that benefit are the ones that have access to the most data. Therefore, in many instances, innovation will no longer be a countervailing force to market concentration and scale. Instead, innovation will be a force that furthers them.”
Google’s employee push back warrants observation as the company tries to guide itself through choppy high technology water.
Patrick Roland, April 12, 2018
Yikes! Google Kiddie YouTube a Target
April 12, 2018
I thought Google and its kiddie YouTube had figured out how to show age appropriate videos to children. If the information in the story “Child Advocates Ask FTC to Investigate YouTube” is accurate, the GOOG may face some PR challenges. Nothing is quite as volatile as an online advertising site displaying videos which can be perceived as inappropriate. Because the write up is branded “AP” which once meant Associated Press, I am unwilling to quote from the write up. If my understanding of the assertions in the “news” story are accurate, I recall learning:
- “Child advocate groups” — no, I don’t know what outfits these are — want Google to be “investigated.”
- Google apparently profits from showing ads to children. (Who knew?)
- Google has an app but it is not too popular with parents. (I don’t know who does not use the app because the AP story did not tell me as I recall.)
- Google has channels aimed at children. One of these may be named ChuChuTV. (Nifty spelling of “choo”.)
- Advertisers can get access to children but if the child says, “Googzilla, I am not 13” some content is blocked. (If I were a child, I would probably figure out how to get access to the video about unicorn slime pretty quickly.)
Among the entities I recall seeing identified in the article are:
- Georgetown University law clinic
- Jeff Chester, The Center for Digital Democracy
- Josh Golin, Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood
- Senator Edward Markey
- Juliana Gruenwald Henderson, an FTC professional
- Kandi Parsons, once an FTC lawyer
What’s missing? Links, examples of bad videos, data about what percent of kiddie YouTube programming is objectionable, and similar factual data.
I don’t want to be suspicious, but regardless of filtering method, some content may be viewed as offensive because subjective perception is not what smart software does well at this point in time.
In March 2018 I was appointed to a Judicial Commission focused on human trafficking and child sex abuse. My hope is that the documents and data which flow to me do not include assertions without specific entities being identified or with constraints that make me fearful of quoting from these documents in my writings.
After 50 years of professional work, I am not easily surprised. Therefore, I am not surprised that online ad vendors similar to Google would focus on generating revenue. I am not surprised that videos vetted by smart software may make mistakes when “close enough for horseshoes” or “good enough” thresholds may be implemented for decision making. I am not surprised that individuals who spend time watching kiddie videos find content which is inappropriate.
Perhaps follow up stories from the “Associated Press” will beef up the details and facts about Google’s problems with kiddie YouTube. Quotes from folks are what “real” journalists do. Links, facts, and data are different from quotes. Make enough phone calls, and one can probably get a statement that fits the “real” news template.
Net net: I think more specifics would be helpful particularly if the goal is to find Google “guilty” of breaking a law, wrong doing, or some other egregious behavior. For now, however, the matter warrants monitoring. Accusations about topics like trafficking and child sex abuse and related issues are inflammatory. Quotes don’t cut it for me.
Stephen E Arnold, April 12, 2018
Correlation the SEO Way. Maybe Not?
April 11, 2018
Here is a fact about Hollywood: They love to boil movies down to a formula and regurgitate every movie into said formula over and over again. Some examples are Disney animated films, superhero films prior to the Disney Marvel franchise, and the Roman/Greek epics circa mid-twentieth century. Instead of focusing on how to tell a good story, Hollywood focuses on the auxiliary components like location, actors, and special effects.
Micheal Martinez from SEO Theory recently wrote, “Google Correlation Studies Are Sham Search Engine Optimization” and expressed that trying to learn anything from Google correlation studies is worthless. It is like Hollywood trying to develop a formula that delivers absolutely nothing. Martinez explains that Google changes it search rankings based on an algorithm. That algorithm is updated in real time from Google’s search index, so trying to create a formula to guarantee top hits is useless:
“The illusion of the power of correlation studies was driven by the popularity of one or two well-known “SEO” blogs — but I don’t want to single anyone out because, frankly, this problem didn’t arise due to the popularity of anyone’s blog. This problem arose because people in the SEO industry are too gullible and willing to accept any bullshit that is embedded in a Power Point presentation or infographic. That is, 100% of us put too much credence into presentation and insufficient analysis into methodology. I can’t exclude myself from that — not because I have ever believed any of these “correlation does not equal causation (wink wink)” arguments but because I find it too easy to point to what someone else says and use that as a reference for something I want to believe. I catch myself doing this all the time.”
There is not a reliable way to track and measure Google’s algorithm data. The only people who know that information are Google employees and they are not about to share their secrets. It is smart to be aware of SEO practices to develop good content, just do not follow them religiously.
Whitney Grace, April 11, 2018
Google Argues With Russia About Website Rankings
April 10, 2018
Amidst its employee petitions and the increasing concern about YouTube videos for children, Google is annoyed with Russia.
Google fiddled with its ranking algorithm to stop the dissemination of fake news and Russia believes it is biased against two of its news agencies. Reuters describes more of the argument in the story, “Google Seeks To Defuse Row With Russia Over Website Rankings.” Roskomnadzor called out Alphabet Inc. and its popular search engine Google, when it claimed that Google pushed Russian media sites Sputnik and Russia Today into lower search results.
Eric Schmidt claimed that Google would not be deleting those links, instead they would be pushed lower in search results. Russia claimed Google discriminated against Russia Today and Sputnik, also saying they would take action if necessary. Google responded:
“ ‘We’d like to inform you that by speaking about ranking of web-sources, including the websites of Russia Today and Sputnik, Dr. Eric Schmidt was referring to Google’s ongoing efforts to improve search quality,’ Google said in a letter posted on Roskomnadzor’s website… ‘We don’t change our algorithm to re-rank,’ it added. A Google spokeswoman confirmed the letter had been sent by the company but provided no further comment.”
Years ago Mr. Brin’s trip to space fizzled. Now the search giant is finding fault with a country known to use interesting methods to solve problems.
Whitney Grace, April 10, 2017
Google Wobbles
April 8, 2018
I noted that some of Google’s employees are not happy with the firm’s decision to apply its smart software to US government projects. What’s interesting is that for years, grousing at Google was low key. When Xooglers began posting their thoughts about the company, there was some activity which fizzled quickly. I wondered why no one was doing Google “tell all” type writing.
Now Google faces yet another management challenge. A UPI story reports that Google employees are protesting. The Googlers don’t want the ad supported search giant supporting the Pentagon’s drone strike program. (Tip: If you are a target, a mobile phone with a GPS capability is not your friend.)
According the story:
In a letter to Google CEO Sundar Pichai, the employees voiced opposition to Project Maven, “a customized AI surveillance engine that uses ‘Wide Area Motion Imagery’ data captured by U.S. government drones to detect vehicles and other objects, track their motions, and provide results to the Department of Defense.”
From my vantage point in Harrod’s Creek, Google may face some challenges with regard to staff management.
With this UPI story in mind, I noted an essay titled “Google’s Near Monopoly May Be Crumbling.” The article asserts:
The broader point is that the awesome market power of behemoths like Facebook and Google may be far more vulnerable than investors and rivals have assumed.
That strikes me as a bit of wishful thinking. The notion that a metasearch engine which relies on Bing or another Web index for results can challenge Google is a bit of a stretch. Alternatives to Google are available, but neither Qwant or Yandex is likely to deliver what users of Google seem to want.
I do think that Google’s management capabilities are showing signs of weakness. I believe that the real challenge to Google resides within the firm’s 60,000 staff and thousands of contractors.
The idea that a union or federation of employees may gain some traction. Human resources, not technology or user loyalty, may be the most vulnerable component of Google.
The reason is that from its inception, Google favored an engineering approach to management. The firm’s engineering may not be top drawer, but it is good enough. I think Google’s handling of its human resources and personnel problems will make clear if the “soft” or “illogical” aspect of running a business is an asset or a liability.
Stephen E Arnold, April 7, 2018
Social Media Fantasy Land? Hello, Hello?
April 5, 2018
We noted Facebook’s minor correction. That Cambridge Analytica – GSR 50 million person data glitch; it is now 87 million. Minor stuff. “Facebook Says Cambridge Analytica May Have Had Data on 87 Million People” states:
The 87 million number is the maximum amount of people that could have impacted, according to Facebook’s calculations. CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in a call with reporters on Wednesday that it got to that number by looking at the maximum number of friends its users had at the time.
Okay, just a minor mistake. Keep in mind that Facebook has 2.3 billion or so “users.” A mere 87 million is not even 10 percent of this select group of well informed, online savvy Facebookers.
I like the “maximum” too. Because Facebook has apparently generated this figure, I know it is rock solid. Why would Facebook obfuscate? I can’t think of a single reason. Perhaps investigators will come up with at least one or two hypotheses?
In this context of revising a 50 million figure to an 87 million figure, we think some analysts are working hard to make social media vendors into really great outfits. In “Using Artificial Intelligence to Investigate Illegal Wildlife Trade on Social Media” I learned:
“Methods from artificial intelligence are being developed and used to investigate the supply chain of the illegal wildlife trade in an innovative and novel way, stresses the importance of such novel methods to identify relevant data on the illegal wildlife trade from social media platforms.”
This movement has become quite far reaching to stop the hunting of elephants and rhinos for their ivory. We spotted a snow leopard jacket for sale on eBay.
The coat was manufactured in Kabul. Those filters are working really well too.
Even Google is working to preserve animals. The well managed company and ZSL recently teamed up to also help pinpoint poaching hopefully before it happens and definitely after it occurs.
With Facebook revising numbers and Google using its smart software to help minimize poaching, Silicon Valley touchstones are doing excellent work.
“Management excellence in action,” opined one of the Beyond Search researchers. From people to animals, online is setting a new standard in governance infused with smart software.
Stephen E Arnold, April 5, 2018
Google and Search: More Churn Turmoil
April 4, 2018
I read “John Giannandrea, Head of Google’s Cornerstone Web-Search Unit, Steps Down.” I found the phrase “steps down” amusing. I think the wizard went to the Apple orchard. Since Mr. Giannandrea ran search, Google search has become less useful to me. Now I have to use multiple search systems to locate what I think are slam dunk queries. Nope. I get some pretty off the wall Google search results.
Two points jumped out of this story for me.
First, Google is forced to go back to one of the early Googlers from the AltaVista.com team. (I did some work for an outfit called PersimmonIT, which was a provider to AltaVista.com.) What’s interesting is that Jeff Dean is one of the really old Google guard. I know he’s bright and capable but that begs this question: “Aren’t their younger, smarter, and as or more capable professionals to get the over hyped Google artificial intelligence operation underway.” I can suggest at least one candidate from the DeepMind team. But, hey, who really cares?
Second, search must be pretty broken. The job has fallen to another old timer at the GOOG. Same question: “Aren’t there younger, more with it technical wizards who can handle the massively complex, software wrapped, advertising centric systems? (Yep, systems because there is “regular” search and “mobile” search. Two search systems are part of the index puzzle Google has built over the years.) Plus, do you remember Google’s “universal” search which, as aBearStearns’ legend has it, was cooked up over a weekend to deal with a PR problem triggered by an analyst’s report to which yours truly contributed. You know “universal.” One query gets you blog content, new Web sites, Google Books, Google Scholar, yada yada. That doesn’t exist and probably will never come to pass for some pretty good reasons. But saying something is just as good as delivering I assume.)
Net net: Google is now a mature company. The founders have distanced themselves from the legal troubles in which the company is mired. The company is caught in the Silicon Valley backlash. The Oracle Jave thing is a Freddie Kruger thing for the GOOG. Management change is a companion to the craziness which seems to characterize some units of the company.
I wonder if a query launched from a desktop computer will return on point results in the near future. I sure hope so.
Stephen E Arnold, April 4, 2018
Not Everyone Is Nervous about Google
April 3, 2018
Over at the Android Authority, writer Tristan Rayner has crafted a counter argument to former Google engineer Steve Yegge’s criticism of the company. Yegge spent 13 years at Google, after a 6-year stint at Amazon, and claims Google is suffering from a profound failure to innovate. Rayner disagrees, mostly, countering the departing engineer’s assertion with specific points. See the write-up for the details of those defenses, including shifting perceptions of what is “innovative” and considerations of scale. A list of several areas where Google is in the lead rounds out Rayner’s case, beginning with AI:
“A short and incomplete list of things Google is leading in starts with AI. Google Assistant dominates everything other than Alexa. The DeepMind acquisition has famously beaten Go, and also improved energy efficiency at global data centers, and their photo and image AI is world class. Of course, that’s only scratching the surface. It’s very hard to see what’s changing in Search, which raises an important point. First we see the big innovations, such as Search, Gmail, YouTube, Maps, and StreetView. The curse of such successful innovation is that it grows to become enormous. The Google Search codebase is more than two billion lines of code. Search is locked into first place, and decades of fine-tuning — more than 50 million commits — have kept Google in front. That’s innovation we’ll rarely see any hint of beyond better results. Most of us use Google Maps as a boring-but-necessary utility, rather than a source of delight. It isn’t exciting anymore, but Google is so far ahead of other map services it’s ridiculous. … “With the new AI-powered Clips camera, Google Photos will offer amazing AI insight into your photos, as well as free storage and a host of new experimental Photos apps. Google AMP was a response to Facebook Instant Articles and it won — AMP is now a significant part of the web for publishers.”
Speculation about certain personalities involved and inter-corporate rivalry conclude the write-up. Rayner makes a point of his respect for Yegge as a professional, but is firmly convinced he is mistaken on this one.
Cynthia Murrell, April 3, 2018
Google Amp: Good for Google. Others? Hmmm.
April 2, 2018
Google Amp receives a bit of lab testing from TimKadlec.com. The article is “How Fast Is Amp Really?”
The write up, complete with hard data and graphs, is worth reading. Google Amp is supposed to speed up the mobile Web for those who view pages on mobile phones. (That’s about 60 percent of the world by some estimates.)
Here’s a snippet from this useful analysis:
If we’re grading AMP on the goal of making the web faster, the evidence isn’t particularly compelling. Every single one of these publishers has an AMP version of these articles in addition to a non-AMP version. Every. Single. One. And for more often than not, these non-AMP versions are heavy and slow. If you’re reading news on these sites and you didn’t click through specifically to the AMP library, then AMP hasn’t done a single thing to improve your experience. AMP hasn’t solved the core problem; it has merely hidden it a little bit.
Beyond Search believes that Amp is good for the Google, maybe not so much for the user geese.
Stephen E Arnold, April 2, 2018
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
