Open Source: A Good to Be Exploited?
December 25, 2019
Is Amazon Web Services taking undue advantage of open source software, or is it simply giving its users what they want (or perhaps both)? It seems to be a matter of perspective. ZDNet reports, “AWS Hits Back at Open-Source Software Critics: Claims that AWS is Strip-Mining Open-Source Software is ‘Silly and Off-Base,’ Says Exec.” The defense is in response to a piece (paywalled) in the New York Times in which open-source creators complained the company takes the liberty of freely integrating their work into its profitable platform. Writer Liam Tung specifies:
“According to the New York Times report, several rivals have discussed bringing antitrust complaints against AWS. Bloomberg reported this month that the Federal Trade Commission has asked software companies about AWS. Cloudflare CEO Matthew Prince told the NYT that ‘people are afraid that Amazon’s ambitions are endless’. Cloudflare operates a large content distribution network, which competes with a subsection of AWS.”
We also learn that open-source firms are shifting their licensing terms in response to such cloudy business practices from IBM and others, as well as Amazon. MongoDB’s Server Side Public License is one example. Elastic, maker of Elasticsearch, has also placed limits on how cloud companies may use its software.
AWS VP Andi Gutmans, however, insists this is much ado about nothing. Tung quotes the executive:
“‘The [Times] story is largely talking about open source software projects and companies who’ve tried to build businesses around commercializing that open-source software. These open-source projects enable any company to utilize this software on-premises or in the cloud, and build services around it. AWS customers have repeatedly asked AWS to build managed services around open source,’ Gutmans said. He noted that AWS contributes to open-source projects such as Linux, Java, Kubernetes, Xen, KVM, Chromium, Robot Operating System, Apache Lucene, Redis, s2n, FreeRTOS and Elasticsearch.
“‘A number of maintainers of open-source projects build commercial companies around the open-source project. A small set of outliers see it as a zero-sum game and want to be the only ones able to freely monetize managed services around these open-source projects,’ he added.”
And the remediation process? Lawyers are standing by.
Cynthia Murrell, December 25, 2019
From the Home of Evil Corp.: Streaming Demons Stir the Pot
December 17, 2019
DarkCyber spotted this write up: “Russia’s 3rd-Largest Internet Company Is Suing Twitch for $3 Billion, Wants It Banned in the Country.” The story asserts that Rambler Group, which figures in other interesting activities, is:
planning to sue the Amazon-owned streaming site for 180 billion rubles ($2.82 billion) in a Russian court. It claims that Twitch breached its exclusive broadcast rights to Premier League games more than 36,000 times between August and November. The company also seeks a permanent ban on Twitch in Russia.
DarkCyber recalls stories about Evil Corp.; for example, this one: “‘Evil Corp’: Feds Charge Russians in Massive $100 million Bank Hacking Scheme.” That write up reported:
“Evil Corp.,” a name reminiscent of the nickname for the key malevolent corporation in the popular television drama “Mr. Robot,” is “run by a group of individuals based in Moscow, Russia, who have years of experience and well-developed, trusted relationships with each other,” according to a Treasury Department press release. The criminal group used a type of malware known as “Dridex,” which worked to evade common anti-virus software and spread through emailed phishing campaigns.
Bookends, peanut butter and jelly, or ham and eggs?
These two alleged legal actions raise a number of questions:
- Which is more evil? Stealing soccer broadcasts or individual’s money?
- Why aren’t certain content types just blocked? China seems to be reasonably adept at filtering?
- Will soccer fans stop looking for low cost pirate streams or will gamers give up on Amazon Twitch because of a legal action?
- Who is behind pirated content? (Some of the key players may be a surprise, DarkCyber believes.)
Worth monitoring these symmetrical legal actions? Yep.
Stephen E Arnold, December 17, 2019
Google Faces Anti-Trust Allegations in Georgia
December 9, 2019
Countries large and small are thinking about Google.
Once again, Google is being charged with anti-competitive behavior. We have grown used to seeing such lawsuits proceed in the EU, but this time the allegations come from a company based in Atlanta. The Hindu Business Line reports, “Google Accused by Rival of Anti-Trust Violations in Ad Market.” The write-up specifies:
“Advertising technology company Inform Inc alleges that Google has used its monopoly power in internet search and mobile operating systems to undermine competition in the ad market. Inform claims that while it posted revenue of more than $100 million from 2014 to 2016 from its online ad services, Google’s conduct effectively put Inform out of business, according to the complaint filed Monday in federal court in Atlanta. The totality of Google’s illegal and anti-competitive conduct across multiple, inter-related markets demonstrates a frightening march to online and digital dominance, the company said in the suit. The lawsuit comes on the heels of antitrust investigations into Google by state attorneys general, the Justice Department and Congress. Google’s control over the technology that delivers ads across the web are a focus of all the probes.”
Inform provides online video ad services to publishers and advertisers, so it is in direct competition with those services from Google. Interesting timing—earlier this year, Inform agreed to a merger with digital advertising firm Bright Mountain Media, based in Boca Raton, Florida.
Cynthia Murrell, December 9, 2019
Apple, Google Redraw Maps upon Russian Demand
December 7, 2019
Ukraine, the U.S., the European Union, and most of the world have all refused to recognize Crimea as part of Russia following the 2014 annexation. Apple, though, seems to have taken Russia’s side—at least as far as anyone who uses Apple Maps or Apple’s weather app from within Russia can see. There, Crimea has been cemented as part of Russia in the online references. Everywhere else Crimea shows as a separate territory. The BBC reports, “Apple Changes Crimea Map to Meet Russian Demands.” The write-up states:
“The State Duma, the Russian parliament’s lower house, said in a statement: ‘Crimea and Sevastopol now appear on Apple devices as Russian territory.’ Russia treats the naval port city of Sevastopol as a separate region. The BBC tested several iPhones in Moscow and it appears the change affects devices set up to use the Russian edition of Apple’s App Store. Apple had been in talks with Russia for several months over what the State Duma described as ‘inaccuracy’ in the way Crimea was labelled. The tech giant originally suggested it could show Crimea as undefined territory – part of neither Russia nor Ukraine. But Vasily Piskaryov, chairman of the Duma security and anti-corruption committee, said Apple had complied with the Russian constitution. He said representatives of the company were reminded that labelling Crimea as part of Ukrainian territory was a criminal offence under Russian law, according to Interfax news agency. ‘There is no going back,’ Mr Piskaryov said. ‘Today, with Apple, the situation is closed – we have received everything we wanted.’”
Apple was not the first to cave on this issue, however; we learn Google did the same thing with Google Maps back in March. Why would tech companies agree to support Russia’s claim when most of the world does not? Apple has made no comment on the issue, but it looks like the almighty ruble is indeed a powerful thing.
Cynthia Murrell, December 7, 2019
Amazon Trumped?
December 5, 2019
DarkCyber does not have a dog in this fight. The fight? Jeff Bezos versus the President of the United States. If the information in “Trump Bezos Round 2: Amazon Faces Broad Antitrust Probe of Cloud Business” is accurate, lawyers involved in the matter will have a very good chance to generate some billable hours.
The write up reminds the reader that Amazon lost the $10 billion Department of Defense JEDI deal. Amazon then sued on the basis of the President’s pushing back against Amazon.
The write up reports:
But now, as Bloomberg details, investigators at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission have been asking software companies recently about practices around Amazon’s cloud unit, known as Amazon Web Services. Specifically, the outreach by the FTC signals that the agency, which is already looking at Amazon’s conduct in its vast online retail business, is taking a broader look at the company to determine whether it could be violating antitrust laws and harming competition.
Interesting. Mr. Bezos has money and a newspaper. The President has presidential things. Will presidential things trump the Bezos bulldozer?
In a comment to the write up, Sticky_Pickles said: “When you try to sue the government…”
But DarkCyber is thinking of the lawyers working on the matter. Winners.
Stephen E Arnold, December 5, 2019
Xnor Touch Points
November 29, 2019
If you are not familiar with Xnor.ai, navigate to the company’s Web site and read the cultural information. There is a reference to diversity, the company being a “high growth start up,” and something called “ethics touch points.”
I think one of the touch points is not honoring deals with licensee, but my information comes from a razzle dazzle publication. “Wyze’s AI-Powered Person Detection Feature Will Temporarily Disappear Next Year” asserts:
Wyze’s security cameras will temporarily lose their person detection feature in January 2020 after the AI startup it partnered with on the feature abruptly terminated their agreement. In a post on its forums, Wyze said that its agreement with Xnor.ai included a clause allowing the startup to terminate the contract “at any moment without reason.”
There’s a reference to “mistakes,” in the tradition of 21st century information, there’s no definition of mistake.
I noted this passage: passage “Wyze’s low prices come with risks.”
Back up.
What’s an ethical touch point? Xnor.ai states:
Xnor is actively engaging in conversations around the ethical implications of AI within our society through “ethics touch points” that exist within our normal working patterns. These touch points allow is to actively review specific AI use cases and make informed decisions without compromising the speed in which we operate as a start-up.
Maybe recognizing a face is not good? When is recognizing a face good? I struggle with the concept of ethics mostly because I am flooded with examples of ethical crossroads each day. Was a certain lawyer in Ukraine for himself or for others? Was the fuselage failure of a 777 a mistake or a downstream consequence of an ethical log jam? Was the disappearance of certain map identifiers a glitch or an example of situational ethical analysis?
With about $15 million in funding, Xnor.ai the two year old company is an interesting one. What’s interesting is that Madrona Ventures may find itself with some thorns in its britches after pushing through the thicket of ethical touch points.
In 2017, Pymnts.com ran a story with this headline: “AI Startup Xnor.ai Raises $2.6M To Bring AI To All Devices.” See the word “all.”
That should have come with a footnote maybe? Other possibilities are: [a] the technology does not work, [b] Wyze did not pay a bill, [c] Xnor.ai has done what Aristotle did ineffectively.
Stephen E Arnold, November 29, 2019
Turkey Day: Forgetting a Murderer?
November 28, 2019
Who knows if one can forget a murder or a murderer? If the information is not available, then the murderer may not be a murderer. The logic seems a bit hippy dippy, almost millennial, but it is turkey day with time to ponder “German Ex-Con Wins Right to Have Any Murders He May Have Committed Forgotten” reports:
Although the case stretches back to the early Eighties, the issue really emerged when German magazine Der Spiegel published some archive articles about the case in 1999. In 2002, Gunther The Ripper was released from jail, and in 2009 became aware that the articles were floating about. Gunther argued that the news articles were inhibiting his “ability to develop his personality,” and went to federal court.
If a murder were committed and the victim a child, will the parents forget? What if this story is accurate and the murderer wants to work coaching a youth football team, would the alleged murderer forget he may have killed before?
Ah, forget it.
Stephen E Arnold, November 28, 2019
NSO Group and Facebook: An Escalation
November 27, 2019
“Workers at Israeli Surveillance Firm NSO Sue Facebook for Blocking Private Accounts” adds some zest to the dust up between the digital country of Facebook and a company which develops policeware. Facebook’s WhatsApp accused NSO of fiddling with content of the encrypted messaging service.
Reuters reports:
NSO employees said Facebook had imposed a “collective punishment” by choosing to block their private accounts due to the legal process Facebook is conducting against NSO. They also said their lawsuit came only after they made repeated requests to Facebook that went unanswered. “Blocking our private accounts is a hurtful and unjust move by Facebook,” the statement said. “The idea that personal data was searched for and used is very disturbing to us”.
In this legal battle of a digital nation and a software and services company, whose lawyers will prevail?
Worth monitoring because policeware (software and services for law enforcement) and intelware (software and services for intelligence agencies) is rarely in the news.
Will the story have legs or will the legal eagles nibble at these entities patellas? Maybe crippling one or both?
Stephen E Arnold, November 27, 2019
Open Source Goodness? Not So Fast
November 18, 2019
DarkCyber does not have a dog in the fight. Open source software has been an interesting sector. However, there may be some tension in open source land. If you have a stake in open source software, you will want to read “Venture Capital Shillscapegoating Free Software’s Failures.” I noted this statement in the article:
Venture capitalists and hireling lawyers make convenient scapegoats. The old, creaky pillars of the free software movement need convenient scapegoats, because the facts on the ground raise serious doubt about the effectiveness of their leadership and the byzantine, insular ideology of copyleft they impose. When the facts don’t help, substitute narrative. You can rule on narrative alone, at least for a while.
Free software has found its way into some interesting products and services. Some of these are backed by big money; for example, LucidWorks, Palantir, and even IBM Watson.
So what?
No answers shall be forthcoming from DarkCyber. You, gentle reader, are on your own to ponder the Amazon open source plays, the future of proprietary software stripped of open source goodness, and venture firms betting that the “community” will keep on being communal.
Stephen E Arnold, November 18, 2019
Tech Backlash: Not Even Apple and Goldman Sachs Exempt
November 11, 2019
Times are indeed interesting. Two powerful outfits—Apple (the privacy outfit with a thing for Chinese food) and Goldman Sachs (the we-make-money-every way possible organization) are the subject of “Viral Tweet about Apple Card Leads to Goldman Sachs Probe.” The would-be president’s news machine stated, “Tech entrepreneur alleged inherent bias in algorithms for card.” The card, of course, is the Apple-Goldman revenue-generating credit card. Navigate to the Bloomberg story. Get the scoop.
On the other hand, just look at one of the dozens and dozens of bloggers commenting about this bias, algorithm, big name story. Even more intriguing is that the aggrieved tweeter’s wife had her credit score magically changed. Remarkable how smart algorithms work.
DarkCyber does not want to retread truck tires. We do have three observations:
- The algorithm part may be more important than the bias angle. The reason is that algorithms embody bias, and now non-technical and non-financial people are going to start asking questions: Superficial at first and then increasingly on point. Not good for algorithms when humans obviously can fiddle the outputs.
- Two usually untouchable companies are now in the spotlight for subjective, touchy feely things with which neither company is particularly associated. This may lead to some interesting information about what’s up in the clubby world of the richest companies in the world. Discrimination maybe? Carelessness? Indifference? Greed? We have to wait and listen.
- Even those who may have worked at these firms and who now may be in positions of considerable influence may find themselves between a squash wall and sweaty guests who aren’t happy about an intentional obstruction. Those corporate halls which are often tomb-quiet may resound with stressed voices. “Apple” carts which allegedly sell to anyone may be upset. Cleaning up after the spill may drag the double’s partners from two exclusive companies into a task similar to cleaning sea birds after the gulf oil spill.
Will this issue get news traction? Will it become a lawyer powered railroad handcar creeping down the line?
Fascinating stuff.
Stephen E Arnold, November 11, 2019
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
