China: Prudence or Protectionism?
July 15, 2021
With many countries struggling with cyber breaches, China seems to be implementing procedures. Are these prudent steps or actions designed to enforce protectionist policies. “China Tightens Rules on Foreign IPOs in New Blow to Tech Firms” reports:
China proposed new rules that would require nearly all companies seeking to list in foreign countries to undergo a cybersecurity review, a move that would significantly tighten oversight over its internet giants.
The write up somewhat optimistically suggests that companies seeking to list on a non-US / non-Euro-centric stock exchange will elect to embrace Hong Kong.
Maybe not.
Is the decision to link listing with cyber security a wild and crazy idea, or is China taking a leadership position in cyber prophylaxis?
Worth monitoring this possible move.
Stephen E Arnold, July 15, 2021
Apple Threatens the UK?
July 12, 2021
Apple is a friendly company. It cares about security and privacy. It wants to hobble other technopolies with its user-centric approach ad tracking. Apple wants the Apple app store to be the bestest place in the world for developers to make their products available (even if some of those products don’t work as advertised) to the Apple customers. There are so many goodnesses associated with Apple, this headline has to be a misunderstanding: “Apple Attorneys Threaten UK Market Exit If Court Orders Unacceptable Patent Fees.”
It seems clear that the word “threat” is a strong one. The notion that “fees” might dissuade a trillion dollar company is puzzling. The write up reports:
Apple’s lawyers have warned the iPhone maker could exit the UK if a court orders it to pay “commercially unacceptable” fees to patent company Optis Cellular over alleged infringement of 3G and 4G patents. Apple is currently involved in a lawsuit with Optis in the United Kingdom, with Apple refusing to pay the firm license fees for patents Optis claims it used in the iPhone and other technologies. In June, a High Court judge ruled that Apple had infringed two of the patents, and therefore Apple should pay fees.
There are some strong words in this paragraph; for example, infringement, refusing, and High Court judge ruled.
Apple?
Yes, and the write up adds:
This is not the only lawsuit involving Optis that Apple is contending with. In August 2020, a Texas federal jury ruled Apple willfully infringed on 4G LTE patents owned by PanOptis and related companies, including Optis, and that it had to pay $506.2 million. In April 2021, a federal judge allowed a retrial to take place, due to there being “serious doubt” about the verdict.
Does this suggest that Apple is unaware of the function of a patent? Does Apple not understand the laws and customs associated with an inventor who holds a patent?
Possibly.
Several observations are warranted:
- If Apple pulls out of the UK, this might be good news for Samsung, Google, and other vendors of non-Apple mobile phones.
- The idea of a large company threatening a country and its laws is interesting. It may suggest that Apple is tired of mere nation states interfering with its plans to deliver Apple goodness to more people than ever before.
- Since Brexit, the UK lacks pull with other Western European countries. As a result, Britain is to blame for this threat.
This is an interesting posture and one that may be little more than saber rattling. On the other hand, no more Facetime in merrie olde Englande may be a reality for an island nation which has faced invaders, pillagers, and cut purses many times. Where is King Arthur when he’s needed? Merlin uses an iPhone I believe.
Stephen E Arnold, July 12, 2021
Want to Cash In on the TikTok AI?
July 8, 2021
If you want to license the artificial intelligence which chainsaws away IQ points, you can. The vendor is a company called BytePlus, and, yes, it is an official source of the TikTok goodness. Just bring cash and leave your concerns about having data from your use of the system and method winging its way to the land that won over Marco Polo.
“ByteDance Starts Selling TikTok’s AI to Other Companies” states (if you pay up to read the original write up in the weird orange newspaper):BytePlus offers businesses the chance to tap some of TikTok’s secret ingredient: the algorithm that keeps users scrolling by recommending them videos that it thinks they will like. They can use this technology to personalize their apps and services for their customers. Other software on offer includes automated translation of text and speech, real-time video effects and a suite of data analysis and management tools.
Just think you can hook your prospects on short videos about such compelling subjects as enterprise search, the MBA life, personnel management at Google, and cooking on a burning Tesla Plaid.
Stephen E Arnold, July 8, 2021
Microsoft in Perspective: Forget JEDI. Think Teams Together
July 7, 2021
I received some inputs from assorted colleagues and journalistic wizards regarding JEDI. The “real” news outfit CNBC published “Pentagon Cancels $10 Billion JEDI Cloud Contract That Amazon and Microsoft Were Fighting Over.” The write up stated:
… the Pentagon is launching a new multivendor cloud computing contract.
What caused this costly, high-profile action. Was it the beavering away of the Oracle professionals? Were those maintaining the Bezos bulldozer responsible? Was it clear-thinking consultants who asked, “Wasn’t Microsoft in the spotlight over the SolarWinds’ misstep?” I don’t know.
But let’s put this in perspective. As the JEDI deal was transported to a shelf in a Department of Defense store room at the Orchard Range Training Site in Idaho, there was an important — possibly life changing — announcement from Microsoft. Engadget phrased the technology breakthrough this way: Microsoft Teams Together Mode test lets just two people start a meeting. I learned:
Together Mode uses AI-powered segmentation to put all participants in a meeting in one virtual space.
I assume that this was previously impossible under current technology like a mobile phone, an Apple device with Facetime, Zoom, and a handheld walkie talkie, a CB radio, a ham radio, FreeConference.com, or a frequently sanitized pay phone located in a convenient store parking lot near the McCarran International Airport in Las Vegas.
I have a rhetorical question, “Is it possible to print either the news story about the JEDI termination or the FAQ for Together in the midst of — what’s it called — terror printing, horror hard copy effort — wait! — I have it. It is the condition of PrinterNightmare.
I have to stop writing. My Windows 10 machine wants to reboot for an update.
Stephen E Arnold, July 7, 2021
Click Rattling: Tech Giants Explain Their Reality to China
July 6, 2021
Will this end well? Do US technology giants — Google, Facebook, Amazon, Apple and others — believe that operating in concert will alter Chinese policy? “American Internet Giants Hit Back at Hong Kong Doxxing Law” reports that “an industry group representing the largest American Internet companies warned Hong Kong’s government that changes to the city’s data-protection laws could impact companies’ ability to provide services in the city.” [You will have to pay up to read this Gray Lady confection, gentle reader.]
What? “Warn”, “could”, “data protection.”
I must be missing something. Isn’t China is a nation state? Its citizens and companies wishing to operate within its boundaries must conform to its rules and regulations or interesting things happen; for example, mobile death vans and a variation on adult day care.
It’s great that there is a Singapore outfit called the Asia Internet Coalition. I think that collaboration among largely unregulated, money centric US corporations is able to take place for such noble purposes as selling ads. However, what nuance of “China is a nation state” eludes this association and its US technology company members?
The write up reports: Shortly after the law was enacted, Facebook, Google and Twitter all said they had suspended responding to data requests from the Hong Kong authorities. Last month, police officers in the city invoked the law to briefly pull down a website that called for unity among expatriate Hong Kongers in the pro-democracy movement.
Will a refusal to respond to a nation state’s requests constitute behavior deemed illegal or seditious by a country like China?
If this news report is on the money, my hunch hypothesis is that some American technology giants are legends in their own minds. They seem to be acting as if they were real countries, just minus the fungible apparatuses of a country. I have a suggestion. Why doesn’t the Asia Internet Coalition invite the top 12 senior managers of those big US companies to a cruise up the Yangtze? The execs can tour the Shanghai Qingpu Prison and check out the abandoned cities of China’s “forced resettlement” policy.
Issue some warnings in a big news conference before boarding the boat. Warn? Hey, great idea. Issue a news release too. Post on social media. Tweet pictures of interesting structures.
Stephen E Arnold, July 6, 2021`
More TikTok Questions
June 30, 2021
I read “Dutch Group Launches Data Harvesting Claim against TikTok.” The write up states:
Dutch consumer group is launching a 1.5 billion euro ($1.8 billion) claim against TikTok over what it alleges is unlawful harvesting of personal data from users of the popular video sharing platform.
Hey, TikTok is for young people and the young at heart. What’s the surveillance angle?
The write up adds:
“The conduct of TikTok is pure exploitation,” Consumentenbond director Sandra Molenaar said in a statement.
What’s TikTok say? Here you go:
TikTok responded in an emailed statement saying the company is “committed to engage with external experts and organizations to make sure we’re doing what we can to keep people on TikTok safe. It added that “privacy and safety are top priorities for TikTok and we have robust policies, processes and technologies in place to help protect all users, and our teenage users in particular.”
Some Silicon Valley pundits agree with the China-linked harmless app and content provider. No big deal. Are the Dutch overreacting or just acting in a responsible manner? I lean toward responsible.
Stephen E Arnold, June 30, 2021
TikTok: No Risk You Think?
June 28, 2021
I snipped a segment from my most recent lecture about the new Dark Web as this week’s DarkCyber video. More information about the program will appear on Tuesday, June 28, 2021. For now, I want to highlight the “real” news outfit CNBC and its take on TikTok. Remember that TikTok is harmless at least according to one Silicon Valley pundit and aspiring CIA professional.
“TikTok Insiders Say Social Media Company Is Tightly Controlled by Chinese Parent ByteDance” reports as actual factual information instantly doubted by Silicon Valley pundits:
This recruiter, along with four other former employees, told CNBC they’re concerned about the popular social media app’s Chinese parent company, which they say has access to American user data and is actively involved in the Los Angeles company’s decision-making and product development. These people asked to remain anonymous for fear of retribution from the company.
Hey, how about a quote from Jack Ma about the wonderfulness of the Chinese business methodology?
The write up adds:
Most notably, one employee said that ByteDance employees are able to access U.S. user data. This was highlighted in a situation where an American employee working on TikTok needed to get a list of global users, including Americans, who searched for or interacted with a specific type of content — that means users who searched for a specific term or hashtag or liked a particular category of videos. This employee had to reach out to a data team in China in order to access that information. The data the employee received included users’ specific IDs, and they could pull up whatever information TikTok had about those users. This type of situation was confirmed as a common occurrence by a second employee.
If you are interested in the value of data from a mere app, check out the DarkCyber program for June 28, 2021.
Stephen E Arnold, June 28, 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
Restraining Strategic Tech Acquisitions in the EU
June 18, 2021
Anti-big-tech or anti-American? Is there a difference? The Macau News Agency reports, “Germany, France Want to Curb ‘Killer’ Big Tech Deals.” Left out of the headline is the Netherlands, which joins those larger powers in their desire to stop companies like Facebook, Google, and Amazon from making “killer acquisitions.” These are deals in which tech giants snap up budding startups before they can bloom into competitors. We learn:
“EU regulators believe that Facebook’s buyouts of Instagram or WhatsApp, or Google’s purchase of Fitbit, are potential examples of big companies buying out a high-potential startup before it developed into a rival. The EU ministers were discussing the Digital Markets Act, a law being hammered out at European Parliament and among the 27 member states that will take years to come into force. It would create a list of special rules for the handful of big technology companies on how they can operate, including stricter obligations on informing regulators of their buyouts and mergers. At the meeting, EU competition chief Margrethe Vestager insisted that existing rules already offered ways to intervene quickly against such buyouts when they are notified by national authorities. This was the case most recently with Facebook’s acquisition of software provider Kustomer even though that deal is below the EU’s thresholds for notification. The ministers also discussed the Digital Services Act that could force Big Tech into providing more transparency on algorithms and better policing of illegal content.”
The EU currently abides by the country-of-origin principle, wherein the country in which a company’s European operation is based handles enforcement. However, since it feels Ireland bungled the oversight of big tech firms, France suggests the EU re-evaluate that principle. The specific rules it will propose remain to be seen.
Cynthia Murrell, June 18, 2021
Great Moments in PR: Google and France June 2021
June 14, 2021
I am not sure what percentage of Alphabet Google’s annual revenue $268 million represents. My old handheld calculator balks at lots of numbers. I am more of a 00 or 000 kind of old timer. France believes that this figure is fair and appropriate for alleged missteps by the mom and pop online ad company.
I found the article “Google to Improve Ad Practices after Being Slapped with $268 Million Fine” interesting. In fact, I circled in True Blue this passage:
Following the results of this investigation, Google has decided to reach a settlement with the French antitrust authority. As a part of this settlement, the tech giant will have to improve its ad services to offer better interoperability with other platforms, and will also pay a $268 million fine.
Yep, the do better assurance. What was the alleged saying bandied about when Messrs. Brin and Page were roller blading around the Mountain View offices? I think it was this one:
It’s easier to ask forgiveness than it is to get permission.
A slight edit yields:
It’s easier to pay the find than make specific commitments.
Stephen E Arnold, June 14, 2021
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
