Wikipedia: Good for Students, Good for the Google
November 14, 2019
There may be some help for over stressed PhD student.
The Internet Archive is making it even easier to check out online citations, beginning in the most logical place. The organization’s blog describes how it is “Weaving Books into the Web—Starting with Wikipedia.” Writer Brewster Kahle tells us:
“The Internet Archive has transformed 130,000 references to books in Wikipedia into live links to 50,000 digitized Internet Archive books in several Wikipedia language editions including English, Greek, and Arabic. And we are just getting started. By working with Wikipedia communities and scanning more books, both users and robots will link many more book references directly into Internet Archive books. In these cases, diving deeper into a subject will be a single click. … For example, the Wikipedia article on Martin Luther King, Jr. cites the book To Redeem the Soul of America, by Adam Fairclough. That citation now links directly to page 299 inside the digital version of the book provided by the Internet Archive. There are 66 cited and linked books on that article alone. Readers can see a couple of pages to preview the book and, if they want to read further, they can borrow the digital copy using Controlled Digital Lending in a way that’s analogous to how they borrow physical books from their local library.”
The Internet Archive hopes to bring four million more books online over the next few years. It costs about $20 per book, and anyone can help by sponsoring the digitization of specific books or simply donating to the organization. As the director of their Wayback Machine declares, “Together we can achieve universal access to all knowledge, one linked book, paper, web page, news article, music file, video and image at a time.”
Who benefits? Students and, of course, Google. There’s a reason many queries’ results pages point to the Wikipedia service.
Cynthia Murrell, November 14, 2019
Medical Data: A Google Focus for More Than a Decade
November 12, 2019
Medical data. Google has a bit of history. In 2008, Google made a play for personal health records. Don’t remember. Here’s what the interface looked like:
In 2011, this bold play went away. Doesn’t that sound familiar? A discontinued Google service.
Then Google bought DeepMind, the black hole of investment in the UK. DarkCyber noted this story: “Revealed: Google AI Has Access to Huge Haul of NHS Patient Data.” The write up stated:
A data-sharing agreement obtained by New Scientist shows that Google DeepMind’s collaboration with the NHS goes far beyond what it has publicly announced.
There was a dust up, but The Register reported: “Five NHS Trusts Do DeepMind Data Deal with Google. One Says No.”
DarkCyber noted the flurry of reports about Google’s tie up with Ascension, the second largest health care outfit in the US. You can read the paywalled Wall Street Journal story or you can look at one of the dozens of posts recycling this deal.
A few comments, perhaps? Why not?
First, Google has been beavering away at personal health data, including the famous CDC flue report, for more than a decade. Why? That’s a good question.
Second, Google needs new revenue. I know it sounds crazy, but the ad biz is not the same old money machine it was because the cost of “being Google” is rising more rapidly than Google’s old money machine can handle. That’s why YouTube will cuts costs by trimming un-commercial videos. Plus, there are other problems; for example, Google’s famous management style. Health data may open some revenue opportunities? Yep, a handful.
Third, Google’s information is asymmetric. There is a lot of data from Web sites, books, and other open sources. But Google is a laggard when it comes to juicy, useful, easily exploitable fine grained personal data in the hands of Amazon and Facebook. Health data is a useful goodie. Health data is proprietary and quite person centric.
What can Google do with health data? Many things. But those applications are secondary in this blog post. The point today, gentle reader, is that Google is not doing anything new. Health data has been a focal point for a relatively long time.
Oh, would you buy Google insurance? No. Would your would be employer buy information revealing a person was addicted to something? No. You might want to think about your answer. What about personalized ads to the parents of a child with an “issue”? No. Okay. No.
Stephen E Arnold, November 12, 2019
Google: Chronicle Is Not a Sci Fi Disaster Film. It Just Seems Like It
November 12, 2019
“Google’s Cybersecurity Project ‘Chronicle’ Imploding” may not be true. If the information in the Economic Times is accurate, Google has created another business school case study about Silicon management methods, what DarkCyber describes with this acronym HSSCMM (high school science club management methods).
In 2018 Alphabet, the rejiggered “owner” of Google was created to be what the write called “an independent start up.”
Yeah, that sounds good.
The goal of Chronicle was modest: “Revolutionize cybersecurity.”
Yeah, that sounds even better.
Engadget reported in June 2019:
The cybersecurity company launched in January 2018, and it released its first commercial product, Backstory, in March. In a blog post, Chronicle CEO and co-founder Stephen Gillett said Google Cloud’s cybersecurity tools and Chronicle’s Backstory and VirusTotal are complementary and will be leveraged together.
The Economic times’ write up states:
Google’s cybersecurity project named “Chronicle” is imploding in trouble and some employees feel its management “abandoned and betrayed” the original vision, media reports said.
Staff, including the CEO, have looked for green pastures elsewhere. Chronicle was moved back to the Google mother ship. Salaries were a sore point. It seems Chronicle employees were paid less than other “real” Googlers.
Let’s assume that the information is maybe, sort of accurate. In this non sci-fi thought space, here are some observations:
- Thinking, assembling, announcing, and doing can be enhanced with management. No management, problems. Google seems beset with some non-linear challenges.
- The life span of this Google activity seems brief: January 2018 to November 2019. Is the time between launch and problems becoming more abbreviated?
- Google’s moon shot factory may be veering more and more into a boundary world: Big ideas fail due to the humans working on creating a reality.
To sum up: Chronicle may be another marker on the management superhighway. On the other hand, the Chronicle issue is real.
We’re back to Jorge Luis Borges, the Argentinean writer, who observed:
Reality is not always probable, or likely.
My high school science club was unreal but real as well. Click here for the theme song to Chronicle. Sorry, I meant Twilight Zone.
Stephen E Arnold, November 11, 2019
Google: Bert Search Is Here. Where Is Ernie Advertising?
November 10, 2019
Google wants to stay at the top of search, so they are constantly developing new technology to keep their search algorithms ahead the competition. Fast Company shares the latest on Google’s search technology in the article, “Google Just Got Better At Understanding Your Trickiest Searches.” Search queries power all of Google searches and the problem for search algorithms is understanding which words in the query are the most important. Another issue is that the algorithms need to understand how the words relate to one another. The relationship between keywords and their intent is subtle, particularly with all the subtle meanings in the English language.
Google’s newest search algorithm endeavor is dubbed BERT, short for Bidirectional Encoder Representations from Transformers. What does that mean?
“We non-AI scientists don’t have to worry about what encoders, representations, and transformers are. But the gist of the idea is that BERT trains machine language algorithms by feeding them chunks of text that have some of the words removed. The algorithm’s challenge is to guess the missing words—which turns out to be a game that computers are good at playing, and an effective way to efficiently train an algorithm to understand text. From a comprehension standpoint, it helps “turn keyword-ese into language,” said Google search chief Ben Gomes.”
Apparently the more text fed into a search, the better BERT can interpret its meaning. Google search scientists tested BERT by feeding the algorithm an endless stream of text from the search engine results. The “bidirectional” in BERT’s name comes from how the algorithm interprets data. Traditional search algorithms read English search queries from left to right, while BERT’s bidirectional reads the queries from unconventional ways.
The average user will not recognize that BERT has altered their search results, but it will be beneficial to them. BERT will not have the same reaching impact as universal search and knowledge graph, but it does give Google a competitive advantage.
The Wall Street Journal did some Google related sleuthing. The focus is advertising. You can read the story and look at the very millennial diagram in “How Google Edged Out Rivals and Built the World’s Dominant Ad Machine: A Visual Guide.” You will have to pay to learn what the diagram shown below means. You will also have to do some homework to figure out how advertising and search / retrieval are connected. That’s important to some. But that diagram is remarkable. It uses Google colors too.
Whitney Grace, November 10, 2019
The GOOG: Is Self Promotion a Bad Thing?
November 8, 2019
Why would Google not use its position to boost its own services? After all, it is not as though legislators can keep up enough to preempt its maneuvers. The Sydney Morning Herald reports, “Google Algorithm Hogs Internet Traffic, Researchers Say.” The article cites recent research detailing how Google can monopolize nearly half of networks’ capacity for its streaming services, putting other online services at a distinct disadvantage. Writer James Titcomb tells us:
“It puts a spotlight on Google’s role in managing internet traffic as the company is under increased scrutiny over its central role in much of the plumbing of the internet. Internet services use congestion control algorithms (CCAs) to efficiently share bandwidth when there is a potential bottleneck and ‘throttle’, or slow down, certain functions when capacity is stretched. For example, if several people are using a Wi-Fi network at an airport or coffee shop to stream videos, the algorithms will restrict the internet capacity available to each user, and reduce video quality. But researchers at Carnegie Mellon University and software company Nefell Networks found that Google’s algorithm, known as BBR, takes up 40 per cent of internet capacity even when multiple services are competing for traffic. In some instances, when the algorithm was active, other services would have less than 4 per cent of capacity; a tenth of that using Google’s algorithm.”
Google offers this algorithm as open source, though many other sites choose different CCAs. But even those that do adopt Google’s code are at a drastic disadvantage. The write-up says Google did not respond to a request for comment but reminds us the company is famous for amping up its speed wherever, and however, it can.
Cynthia Murrell, October 31, 2019
Google and Health: Still Plugging Along
November 8, 2019
Google is joining the push into healthcare and, not surprisingly, its focus is on search functionality for doctors and patients. Engadget reports, “Google Wants to Give Doctors Web-Like Searches for Medical Records.” We wonder—how long before SEO experts boost ads for drugs related to each patient’s health history?
Writer Jon Fingas summarizes a piece from CNBC that outlines the company’s plans according to Google Health lead David Feinberg. Fingas writes:
“Feinberg envisions a search bar that would help doctors search medical records like they do the web. A doctor could search for ‘87’ to find an 87-year-old patient instead of using the patient’s name, as an example. An insider also claimed that Google is considering a Flights-style dedicated search experience for health. You could research conditions without wading through the regular web to find trustworthy info.
It’s not certain how close either idea is to fruition, and CNBC’s tipster warned that it wasn’t certain the Google search team would sign off on the dedicated health search. Google might have to ditch advertising on the health page. They do indicate how Google Health and Feinberg are thinking, however, and give you a hint of what to expect in the future.”
So, maybe not so much on that SEO potential; we shall see. The write-up notes Feinberg has made other health-related moves, like pulling advertisements from anti-vaxer propaganda on YouTube. Perhaps even more is happening behind the Google Health scenes, Fingas suggests.
The digital business school case study is on the march.
Cynthia Murrell, November 8, 2019
The UAE and AI: What Will Students Learn?
November 7, 2019
DarkCyber noted “Abu Dhabi AI University Is Key to UAE’s Future As the Oil Dries Up.” The write up states:
The Gulf state is developing healthcare, financial services, renewable energy and materials technology sectors, which will make up the UAE economy when the oil runs out. But first, it needs to ensure its citizens have the skills to drive them. The long-term nature of the UAE government’s initiative is what stands out for Oxford University professor Michael Brady, who is interim president of Abu Dhabi’s Mohamed bin Zayed University of Artificial Intelligence (MBZUAI), which was set up to ensure the UAE has the right skills to drive these industries. The Masdar City-based university has just opened to applications for its first intake of 50 students.
Amazon, Google, and Microsoft, among others, have a presence in UAE. The article quoted Professor Brady as saying:
But it was the ambition that he saw when he visited Abu Dhabi, which puts UK government planning to shame, that cemented his interest “There is a stark difference between the short-termism that characterizes so much of government policy in the UK, where politicians worry about the headlines tomorrow morning,” he said. “It is so refreshing to be part of a government-led initiative that has a 30-year vision to transform the economy and the culture.”
The AI university is important. The question the write up did not address is:
What cloud AI service will be the core of the curriculum?
It seems obvious that the go-to cloud system for students will have an advantage in deploying next-generation solutions.
Worth monitoring which of these three cloud aspirants will capture the hearts and minds of the student, UAE officials, and investors who want to cash in on this investment in the future.
Stephen E Arnold, November 7, 2019
The GOOG: Bright People, Interesting Management Tactics
November 6, 2019
Silicon Valley is notorious for its leftist political leanings. As much as the workforce supports leftwing views, Silicon Valley leaders are more concerned with their bottom dollar and maintaining a politically correct image. BuzzFeed News shares that, “Google Removed Employee Questions About Its Hiring Of A Former DHS Staffer Who Defended The Muslim Travel Ban.”
In this recent example of maintaining an inoffensive image, Google removed questions related to hiring Miles Taylor, a former employee of the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS), on the internal Google message board, Dory. Dory is used to ask and vote on questions for management. Information was removed about Taylor due to his support of Trump’s travel ban of Muslims. Google staffers were especially upset about Taylor’s hiring in September 2019, because Google executives actually protested against policies Taylor implemented at the DHS.
Lately, Google is having many problems maintaining free expression for its staffers and “corporate harmony.” Earlier in 2019, Google settled with the National Labor and Review Board about the company’s attempts to prevent employees’ from discussing their dissatisfaction with the company.
Google defended hiring Taylor, because he was not involved in the original Muslim travel ban drafts nor the family separation. Google declined to comment on removing discussions about Taylor, but two close sources did confirm that some of the comments were removed because they were viewed as personal attacks on Taylor. Other discussions about him remained posted on Dory.
It is ironic that Google did hire Taylor based on the executives’ past views:
“Google and its leaders had voiced their strong opposition to the Muslim travel ban and family separations occurring at the Mexico border. In January 2017, following the announcement of the original travel ban, Google cofounder Sergey Brin joined protesters at San Francisco International Airport, while Google CEO Sundar Pichai pointedly voiced his displeasure on Twitter, in an email to staff, and in a much-publicized employee meeting.
‘The stories and images of families being separated at the border are gut-wrenching,’ Pichai tweeted as the Trump administration ramped up its anti-immigration policy in the summer of 2018. ‘Urging our government to work together to find a better, more humane way that is reflective of our values as a nation. #keepfamiliestogether.’”
Are Google executives unaware that their management decisions may be interpreted as off center? Are Google employees allowing politics to control their work place? Maybe it is reflective of the here and now?
Whitney Grace, November 6, 2019
Google: A Ray of Light?
November 5, 2019
Google’s algorithms may not be so bad after all—it seems that humans are the problem yet again. Wired discusses a recent study from Penn State in its article, “Maybe It’s Not YouTube’s Algorithm That Radicalizes People.” Extreme ideological YouTube channels have certainly been growing by leaps and bounds. Many reporters have pointed to the site’s recommendation engine as the culprit, saying its suggestions, often running on auto-play, guide viewers further and further down radicalization rabbit holes. However, political scientists Kevin Munger and Joseph Phillips could find no evidence to support that view. Reporter Paris Martineau writes:
“Instead, the paper suggests that radicalization on YouTube stems from the same factors that persuade people to change their minds in real life—injecting new information—but at scale. The authors say the quantity and popularity of alternative (mostly right-wing) political media on YouTube is driven by both supply and demand. The supply has grown because YouTube appeals to right-wing content creators, with its low barrier to entry, easy way to make money, and reliance on video, which is easier to create and more impactful than text.”
The write-up describes the researchers’ approach:
“They looked at 50 YouTube channels that researcher Rebecca Lewis identified in a 2018 paper as the ‘Alternative Influence Network.’ Munger and Phillips’ reviewed the metadata for close to a million YouTube videos posted by those channels and mainstream news organizations between January 2008 and October 2018. The researchers also analyzed trends in search rankings for the videos, using YouTube’s API to obtain snapshots of how they were recommended to viewers at different points over the last decade. Munger and Phillips divided Lewis’s Alternative Influence Network into five groups—from ‘Liberals’ to ‘Alt-right’—based on their degree of radicalization. … Munger and Phillips found that every part of the Alternative Influence Network rose in viewership between 2013 and 2016. Since 2017, they say, global hourly viewership of these channels ‘consistently eclipsed’ that of the top three US cable networks combined.”
The Penn State team also cites researcher Manoel Ribeiro, who insists his rigorous analysis of the subject, published in July, has been frequently misinterpreted to support the bad-algorithm narrative. Why would mainstream media want to shift focus to the algorithm? Because, Munger and Phillips say, that explanation points to a clear policy solution, wishful thinking though it might be. The messiness of human motivations is not so easily dealt with.
Both Lewis and Ribeiro praised the Penn State study, indicating it represents a shift in this field of research. Munger and Phillips note that, based on the sheer volume of likes and comments these channels garner, their audiences are building communities—a crucial factor in the process of radicalization. Pointing fingers at YouTube’s recommendation algorithm is a misleading distraction.
Cynthia Murrell, November 4, 2019
Google Protest: An Insulting Anniversary
November 2, 2019
DarkCyber noted this write up in CNet, an online information service, which may not be capturing too many Google ads in 2020. Here’s the title and subtitle of the story:
The headline is Googley; that is, it is designed to make the story appear in a Google search results list. The jabber may work. But what may not be as efficacious is building bridges to the Google itself. For example, the write up states:
The Google protests [maybe about sexual matters, management decisions, money?] didn’t achieve everything their organizers were seeking. Several Google workers and former workers are dissatisfied with the company’s response. Organizers say the company has done the bare minimum to address concerns, and employees allege that it has retaliated against workers and sought to quash dissent. “They’ve been constantly paying lip service,” said one Google employee who was involved with the walkout. “It’s insulting to our intelligence,” said the person, who requested anonymity because of fear of retribution from the company.
Then the observation:
Google declined to make its senior leadership team, including co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, CEO Sundar Pichai and human resources chief Eileen Naughton, available for interviews. In a statement, Naughton touted changes Google has made over the past year, including streamlining the process for people to report abuse and other problems.
A few observations may be warranted:
- Google’s management methods may follow the pattern set in high school science clubs when those youthful wizards confront something unfamiliar
- A problem seems to exist within the GOOG
- Outfits like CNet are willing to explain what may be a Google shortcoming because Google is not longer untouchable.
Interesting? If paid employees won’t get along and go along, how will that translate into Google’s commitment to enterprise solutions? What if an employee inserts malicious code in a cloud service as a digital protest? What if… I don’t want to contemplate what annoyed smart people can do at 3 am with access credentials.
Yikes. Insulting.
Stephen E Arnold, November 2, 2019
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
