Google and Unreliable Results: Like the Jack Benny One Liner, I Am Thinking, I Am Thinking
June 25, 2021
I read a “real” news story called “Google Is Starting to Warn Users When It Doesn’t Have a Reliable Answer.” (No, I will not ask, What’s reliable mean.)
Here’s the statement which snagged my attention in the write up:
“When anybody does a search on Google, we’re trying to show you the most relevant, reliable information we can,” said Danny Sullivan, a public liaison for Google Search. “But we get a lot of things that are entirely new,” Sullivan said the notice isn’t saying that what you’re seeing in search results is right or wrong — but that it’s a changing situation, and more information may come out later.
I think Mr. Sullivan, a former search engine optimization guru and conference organizer, is the “new” Matt Cutts, a Google professional helping to point the way to the digital future at the US government. Is key word packing the path to more patents than China?
I loved this statement which I know is pretty Tasmanian devil like: “Most relevant, reliable information we can.” I did a query for garage floor epoxy coating in Louisville. I gathered about 20 businesses display on the first two pages of Google search results. Two companies were in this business. Others were out of business. One “company” called me back and said, “My loser son has been gone for two years.”
I have other examples as well of search either being out of date, spoofed, or just weird.
Let’s look at some of the reasons why Google made a statement about “reliable answers.”
First, I think the difficulty of providing real-time indexing is beyond three Google capabilities: Outfits with real time content won’t play ball with Google unless Google pays up and works out a mechanism to move the content to a Google indexing queue. (Yep, queue as in long line at the McDonald’s drive through.)
Second, Google is not set up to do real time. I think the notion of having a short list of “must ping frequently sites” may be a hold over from the distant past. The reason? As the cost of indexing, updating, and making the Google indexes “consistent” – some of the practices no longer fit the current iteration of “relevant” and “reliable.” Google is not Twitter, and it is not Facebook. Therefore, the pipelines for real time content simply don’t exist. Googlers tried but seemed to be better at selling ads than dealing with new content types.
Third, hot info appears in non text form on Instagram, TikTok, and even places like DailyMotion and Vimeo sometimes days before the content plops into YouTube. Ever try to locate a video using the creator assigned index terms. That’s an exercise in futility. Ads, gentle reader, not relevant and reliable information.
From my vantage point on the porch overlooking a mine drainage pond, I have some hypotheses:
- Google is under financial pressure, a competitive pressure from Amazon and Facebook, and a legal pressure. Almost any nation state with an appetite to drag the Google into court is in gear.
- Google is just not able to handle the real time flows of content, either textual or imagery. Too bad, but that’s the excitement of Hegel’s these, antithese, synthese which “real” Googlers learn along with search engine optimization marketing methods.
- Google’s propagandistic and jingoistic assurances that it returns relevant and reliable results is more and more widely seen as key word spam.
- Google’s management methods are not tuned for the current business environment. I may be alone in noticing that high school science club thinking and management from assumed superiority is out of favor. (If Sergey Brin were to ride a Russian rocket into space, wou8ld he attract more signatures that Jeff Bezos. The quasi referendum did not want Mr. Bezos to return to earth. Mr. Brin’s ride did not materialize, so I won’t know who “won” the most votes.)
Net net: Relevant and reliable. That’s a line worthy of Jack Benny when he is asked about Fred Allen. I give up, “What does ‘reliable’ mean, Googlers.” My suggestion is marketing hoo haa with metatags.
Stephen E Arnold, June 25, 2021
Google: So Darned Useful to Good and Bad Actors
June 25, 2021
Never underestimate hackers’ adaptability and opportunism. E Hacking News reports, “Threat Actors Use Google Drives and Docs to Host Novel Phishing Attacks.” For the first time, security firm Avanan has found, attackers are able to bypass link scanners and other security protections and use Google’s standard document tools to deliver malicious, credential-stealing links. Previously, bad actors have had to lure their victims to a legitimate website in order to exploit its security flaws. Now they can do so right from users’ inboxes. The article cites a recent report from Trend Micro as well as the research from Avanan:
“According to researchers, once the hacker publishes the lure, ‘Google provides a link with embed tags that are meant to be used on forums to render custom content. The attacker does not need the iframe tags and only needs to copy the part with the Google Docs link. This link will now render the full HTML file as intended by the attacker and it will also contain the redirect hyperlink to the actual malicious website.’ The hackers then use the phishing lure to get the victim to ‘Click here to download the document.’ Once the victim clicks, the page redirects to the actual malicious phishing website through a web page designed to mimic the Google Login portal. Friedrich said Avanan researchers also spotted this same attack method used to spoof a DocuSign phishing email. In this case, the ‘View Document’ button was a published Google Docs link that actually was a fake DocuSign login page that would transmit the entered password to an attacker-controlled server via a ‘Log in’ button.”
Stolen login credentials are the most effective way to infiltrate any organization, and with a little social engineering hackers can attract many of them with this approach. It is a good reminder that educated users who do not fall for phishing schemes provide the best protection against such attackers. Alternatively, just download some interesting apps from the Google Play Store.
Cynthia Murrell, June 25, 2021
The Google: EU Action Generates a Meh
June 24, 2021
I read “Europe Is Finally Hitting Google Where It Hurts Most.”
Here’s a passage I found interesting:
The fact that it owns the biggest search engine, video streaming website and e-mail client isn’t the top cause for concern — it’s that the finances of all three are tied together through the ads that pay for them.
Yep, but I would suggest that Google is doing the synergy thing better than most mom and pop outfits.
Here’s another interesting statement:
The problem is that Google holds all of the power. In the auction house analogy, the company is the buyer’s agent, the seller’s agent and often the seller too. It has both the opportunity and incentive to A) overcharge advertisers who have no visibility into the value of competing bids; and B) send more revenue toward its own websites. It can decide to direct my advertising spend towards YouTube, rather than another video site.
I think Google is holding the cards in the online ad game. To make the game more profitable, Google can pull cards from its other data decks. Will the EU try to end the game or just walk out of the Googlegarch’s casino?
Stephen E Arnold, June 24, 2021
Google and Its Engineering Residency: Problem Solved or Is It?
June 24, 2021
I read “Google Drops Engineering Residency after Protests over Inequities.” That means unfair, right? Maybe discriminatory? Nope, more of the good old Google management method in action. Remarkable, but the Google is consistent. Controversy and glitches every which way but loose.
The write up states:
The Google residency, often referred to as “Eng Res,” has since 2014 given graduates from hundreds of schools a chance to work on different teams, receive training and prove themselves for a permanent job over the course of a year. It offered a cohort of peers for bonding, three former residents said. Residents were Google’s “most diverse pool” of software engineers and came “primarily from underrepresented groups,” according to a June 2020 presentation and an accompanying letter to management that one source said over 500 current and former residents signed. Compared with other software engineers, residents received the lowest possible pay for their employment level, a smaller year-end bonus and no stock, creating a compensation deficit “in the mid tens of thousands of dollars,” the presentation said. Nearly all residents converted to regular employees, according to the presentation. Many alumni years later have continued to feel the “negative effect” of their starting pay on their current salary, it said. Google said it worked to eliminate long-term disparities when hiring residents permanently.
Interesting. The protest thing seems to be one way to catch the attention of the president of the digital science club working overtime to deliver quantum supremacy.
Stephen E Arnold, June 24, 2021
Google: Me Too, a Refrigerator, and Innovation
June 23, 2021
Okay, pantry, refrigerator, on ice, whatever. Google is not an innovator; it is a me too outfit. I read “Si! Das Ist Richtig! Google’s Reportedly Building a Duolingo Competitor.” The write up reveals:
the company is preparing a new product called Tivoli that’ll be rolled out later this year. It’ll initially work on text, and will live in Google Search.
I thought I saw a Google slide deck in 2006 which had this in a dot point. Oh, well, history is not exactly what thumbtypers do these days.
The write up states:
Whenever Google launches its efforts, it might a heavy competition from other industry leaders such as Babel, Duolingo, and Rosetta Stone. According to a report by Meticulous Research analytics firm, the online language learning market is set to reach $21.2 billion by 2027. And it wouldn’t surprise me if the search giant is gearing up to grab a big chunk of that booty.
Okay, big numbers and competitors who are entrenched.
What’s interesting is that Google is pulling some of its preserved groceries out of the warehouse and presenting them as alternatives to self driving cars which are sort of self driving, solving death which is a thorny problem, and floating ideas which show that the mom and pop online advertising store is not out of ideas.
There’s a freezer in the company garage stuffed with me toos. Just add marketing, shake, and serve.
Stephen E Arnold, June 23, 2021
Why Messrs Brin and Page Said Adios
June 22, 2021
Years ago I signed a document saying I could not reveal any information obtained, intuited, learned, or received by any means electrical or mechanical from an interesting company for which I did some trivial work. I have been a good person, and I will continue of that path in this short blog post based on open source info and my own cogitations.
Yes, the GOOG. I want to remind readers that in 2019, the dynamic duo, the creators of Backrub, and the beneficiaries of some possible inspiration from Yahoo, GoTo.com, and Overture stepped away from their mom and pop online advertising store. With lots of money and eternal fame in the pantheon of online superstars, this was a good decision. Based on my understanding of information in open sources, the two decades of unparalleled fun was drawing to a close. Thus, hasta la vista. From my point of view, these visionaries who understood the opportunities to sell ads rendered silly ideas like doing good toothless. Go for the gold because there was no meaningful regulation as long as their was blood lust for tchotchkes like blinking Google pins or mouse pads with the Google logo.
But there were in open source information hints of impending trouble; for example:
- Management issues, both personal and company centric. Who can forget drug overdoses, attempted suicides, and baby daddies in the legal department? Certainly not the online indexes which provide valid links here, here, and here. Keep in mind, gentle reader, that these items are from open sources.
- Grousing from Web site owners, partners, and developers. The Foundem persistence gave hope to many that others would speak up despite Google’s power, money, and flotillas of legal destroyers.
- Annoying bleats about competition were emitted with ever increasing stridency from those clueless EU officials. Example number one: Margrethe Vestager. Danes fouled up taking over England, other Scandinavia countries, and lost the lead in ham to the questionable Spanish who fed cinco jota pigs acorns.
Nope, bail out time.
I offer these prefatory sentences because those commenting, tweeting, and blogging about “Google Executives See Cracks in Their Company’s Success” seem to have forgotten the glorious past of the Google. I noted this statement which is eerily without historical context and presented as a novel idea:
But a restive class of Google executives worry that the company is showing cracks. They say Google’s work force is increasingly outspoken. Personnel problems are spilling into the public. Decisive leadership and big ideas have given way to risk aversion and incrementalism. And some of those executives are leaving and letting everyone know exactly why.
Okay. But Messrs Brin and Page left. This is a surprise? Why? The high school science club management method is no longer fun. The crazy technology is expensive and old. The Foosball table needs resurfacing. The bean bags smell. And — news flash — when Elvis left the building, the show was over.
Messrs Brin and Page left the building. Got the picture?
Stephen E Arnold, June 22, 2021
Google: What Is the Value of Fake News? What Did You Say?
June 18, 2021
I read a story which may be hogwash. (If you have ever cleaned a pig, you can recall the delights of that exercise on a 90 degree day in Poland China territory. Note to thumbtypers. Poland China is another name for a Warren County hog.)
The title of the write certainly caught my attention:
Nearly Half of All Ads on Fake News Sites Come from Google, Study Finds
Let’s be clear I am pointing you a second hand write up from a research outfit’s “study.” Frankly I can’t believe that the estimable Google, former employer of Timnit Gebru, and owner of the real artificial intelligence methodology would be engaged in this type of activity. Goodness.
The outfit doing the study was the University of Mich8igan School of Information. Didn’t one of the founders of the Google attend this institution? Here’s a sampling of data from the outfit which spawned really annoying pop up surveys on government Web sites in the 2000s:
- 48% of ad traffic on “fake” news publishers is served by Google
- 32% of “low credibility sites” like Breitbart, Drudge Report, and Sputnik News were delivered by Google
- “The top-10 credible ad servers, like Lockerdome and Outbrain, make up 66.7% of fake and 55.6% of low-quality ad traffic.”
May I repeat what Google has oft repeated when the unpleasant but profitable subject of using whatever gets clicks to produce revenue? Here goes:
the search engine told Marketing Brew in a statement that the company removed ads from “more than 1.3 billion pages that breached” its policies in 2020. “We have strict publisher policies against promoting dangerous and misrepresentative claims,” it said.
Several questions:
- Will Google provide more funding to the Ann Arbor institution in order to provide input into research project plans before the study and the results are made public by real news outfits like Marketing Brew?
- Will Larry Page spend time on campus chatting with researchers and students about the importance of the Google and how to get an insider track to a job at the online ad mom and pop store?
- Will some MBA with time on his or her hands convert these percentages to revenue?
I, on the other hand, will continue to believe in the commitment to ethical business practices, ethical content filtering, and ethical AI just like the Google.
One final question: Will Marketing Brew experience an uptick in its Google “quality” score?
Stephen E Arnold, June 18, 2021
Google Tracking: Not Too Obvious Angle, Right?
June 18, 2021
Apple is the privacy outfit. Remember? Google wants to do away with third party cookies, right? Apple was sufficiently unaware to know that the company was providing a user’s information. Now Google has added a new, super duper free service. I learned about this wonderful freebie in “Google Workspace Is Now Free for Everyone — Here’s How to Get It.” I noted this paragraph:
Anyone with a Google account can use the integrated platform (formerly known as G Suite) to collaborate on the search giant’s productivity apps.
Free. Register. Agree to the terms.
Bingo. Magical, stateful opportunities for any vendor using this unbeatable approach. Need more? The Google will have a premium experience on offer soon.
Cookies? Nope. Better method I posit. And if there is some Fancy Dan tracking? Apple did not know some stuff, and I might wager Google won’t either.
Stephen E Arnold, June 18, 2021
The Myth, the Man: Sundar Sundararajan
June 17, 2021
Want to know about the young Sundararajan? Navigate to “5 Stories Shared By Sundar Pichai From His IIT Days That Will Make Engineers Miss Their College.” Here’s the menu of biographical morsels in the write up:
- Changed name and misused an epithet. More info here, including the shutting down of a four star eatery.
- Met wife and confessed love in the final year of their engineering.
- Wrote with “big hand”. Like Donald Trump’s signature maybe?
- Persecuted or “ragged” by those older than he.
- Studied metallurgical engineering, played cricket, and ate Maggi which looks like a vendor of essentials like instant noodles.
Now you know about the Young Sundar. As some say about cricket, “When you are out, you are in. When you are in, you are out.”
Stephen E Arnold, June 18, 2021
Google and Ethics: Shaken and Stirred Up
June 17, 2021
Despite recent controversies, Vox Recode reports, “Google Says it’s Committed to Ethical AI Research. Its Ethical AI Team Isn’t So Sure.” In fact, it sounds like there is a lot of uncertainty for the department whose immediate leaders have not been replaced since they were ousted and who reportedly receive little guidance or information from the higher-ups. Reporter Shirin Ghaffary writes:
“Some current members of Google’s tightly knit ethical AI group told Recode the reality is different from the one Google executives are publicly presenting. The 10-person group, which studies how artificial intelligence impacts society, is a subdivision of Google’s broader new responsible AI organization. They say the team has been in a state of limbo for months, and that they have serious doubts company leaders can rebuild credibility in the academic community — or that they will listen to the group’s ideas. Google has yet to hire replacements for the two former leaders of the team. Many members convene daily in a private messaging group to support each other and discuss leadership, manage themselves on an ad-hoc basis, and seek guidance from their former bosses. Some are considering leaving to work at other tech companies or to return to academia, and say their colleagues are thinking of doing the same.”
See the article for more of the frustrations facing Google’s remaining AI ethics researchers. The loss of these workers would not be good for the company, which relies on the department to lend a veneer of responsibility to its algorithmic initiatives. Right now, though, Google seems more interested in plowing ahead with its projects than in taking its own researchers, or their work, seriously. Its reputation in the academic community has tanked, we are told. A petition signed by thousands of computer science instructors and researchers called Gebru’s firing “unprecedented research censorship,” a prominent researcher and diversity activists are rejecting Google funding, a Google-run workshop was boycotted by prospective speakers, and the AI ethics research conference FAccT suspended the company’s membership. Meanwhile, Ghaffary reports, at least four employees have resigned and given Gebru’s treatment as the reason. Other concerned employees are taking the opposite approach, staying on in the hope they can make a difference. As one unnamed researcher states:
“Google is so powerful and has so much opportunity. It’s working on so much cutting-edge AI research. It feels irresponsible for no one who cares about ethics to be here.”
We agree, but there is only so much mid-level employees can do. When will Google executives begin to care about developing AI programs conscientiously? When regulators somehow make it more expensive to ignore ethics concerns than to embrace them, we suspect. We will not hold our breath.
Cynthia Murrell, June 17, 2021
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
