Machine Learning Changes the Way We Learn from Data
October 26, 2016
The technology blog post from Danial Miessler titled Machine Learning is the New Statistics strives to convey a sense of how crucial Machine Learning has become in terms of how we gather information about the world around us. Rather than dismissing Machine Learning as a buzzword, the author heralds Machine Learning as an advancement in our ability to engage with the world around us. The article states,
So Machine Learning is not merely a new trick, a trend, or even a milestone. It’s not like the next gadget, instant messaging, or smartphones, or even the move to mobile. It’s nothing less than a foundational upgrade to our ability to learn about the world, which applies to nearly everything else we care about. Statistics greatly magnified our ability to do that, and Machine Learning will take us even further.
The article breaks down the steps of our ability to analyze our own reality, moving from randomly explaining events, to explanations based on the past, to explanations based on comparisons with numerous trends and metadata. The article positions Machine Learning as the next step, involving an explanation that compares events but simultaneously progresses the comparison by coming up with new models. The difference is of course that Machine Learning offers the ability of continuous model improvement. If you are interested, the blog also offers a Machine Learning Primer.
Chelsea Kerwin, October 26, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
The Scottish Philosopher in Silicon Valley
June 6, 2016
When Alistair Duff, professor of information society and policy at Scotland’s Edinburgh Napier University, checked out Silicon Valley, he identified several disturbing aspects of the prevailing tech scene. The Atlantic’s Kevah Waddell interviews the professor in, “The Information Revolution’s Dark Turn.”
The article reminds us that, just after World War II, the idealistic “information revolution” produced many valuable tools and improved much about our lives. Now, however, the Silicon-Valley-centered tech scene has turned corporate, data-hungry, and self-serving. Or, as Duff puts it, we are now seeing “the domination of information technology over human beings, and the subordination of people to a technological imperative.”
Waddell and Duff discuss the professor’s Normative Theory of the Information Society; the potential for information technology to improve society; privacy tradeoffs; treatment of workers; workplace diversity; and his preference that tech companies (like Apple) more readily defer to government agencies (like the FBI). Regarding that last point, it is worth noting Duff’s stance against the “anti-statism” he believes permeates Silicon Valley, and his estimation that “justice” outranks “freedom” as a social consideration.
Waddell asks Duff what a tech hub should look like, if Silicon Valley is such a poor example. The professor responds:
“It would look more like Scandinavia than Silicon Valley. I’m not saying that we shouldn’t develop the tech industry—we can learn a massive amount from Silicon Valley….
“But what we shouldn’t do is incorporate the abuse of the boundary between work and home, we should treat people with respect, we should have integrated workforces. A study came out that only 2 percent of Google’s, Yahoo’s, and a couple of other top companies’ workforces were black. Twelve percent of the U.S. population is black, so that is not good, is it? I’m not saying they discriminate overtly against black people—I very much doubt that—but they’re not doing enough to change things.
“We need the best of Silicon Valley and the best of European social democracy, combined into a new type of tech cluster.
“There’s a book by Manuel Castells and Pekka Himanen called The Information Society and the Welfare State: The Finnish Model, which argues that you can have a different type of information society from the libertarian, winner-takes-all model pioneered in Silicon Valley. You can have a more human, a more proportioned, a tamer information society like we’ve seen in Finland.”
Duff goes on to say that the state should absolutely be involved in building the information society, a concept that goes over much better in Europe than in the U.S. He points to Japan as a country which has built a successful information society with guidance from the state. See the interview for more of Professor Duff’s observations.
Cynthia Murrell, June 6, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
For Sale: Your Bank Information
March 21, 2016
One of the common commodities for sale on the Dark Web is bank, credit card, social security numbers, and other personal information. This information can sell for a few bucks to hundreds of dollars depending on the quality and quantity of the information. In order to buy personal information, usually the interested parties must journey to the Dark Web, but the International Business Times tells us that “Confidential Bank Details Available For Sale On Easily Found Web Site” is for sale on the general Web and the information is being sold for as little as a couple pounds (or dollars for the US folks). The Web site had a pretty simple set up, interested parties register, and then they have access to the stolen information for sale.
Keith Vaz, chairman of the home affairs select committee, wants the National Crime Agency (NCA) to use its power and fulfill its purpose to shut the Web site down.
“A statement from the NCA said: “We do not routinely confirm or deny investigations nor comment on individual sites. The NCA, alongside UK and international law enforcement partners and the private sector, are working to identify and as appropriate disrupt websites selling compromised card data. We will work closely with partners of the newly established Home Office Joint Fraud Task Force to strengthen the response.”
Online scams are getting worse and more powerful in stealing people’s information. Overall, British citizens lost a total of 670 million pounds (or $972 million). The government, however, believes the total losses are more in the range of 27 billion pounds (or $39.17 billion).
Scams are getting worse, because the criminals behind them are getting smarter and know how to get around security defenses. Users need to wise up and learn about the Dark Web, take better steps to protect their information, and educate themselves on how to recognize scams.
Whitney Grace, March 21, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Was the Silk Road Trial Fair?
February 17, 2016
The Dark Web burst into the general consciousness with underground Web site called the Silk Road was busted. Ross Ulbricht aka the Dread Pirate Roberts ran the crime ridden Web site Silk Road that was a darknet playground for drug pushers, sex traffickers, money launders, hackers, and just about every other relatable crime that wants an untraceable presence. The Naked Security blog by Sophos proposes the question “Ross Ulbricht Appeals Silk Road Conviction-Did He Get A Fair Trial?”
In 2015, Ulbricht was convicted for money laundering, drug and hacking-related charges, and sentenced to two life terms with an additional forty years for running the entire Silk Road network. Ulbricht’s lawyers appealed the case based on the grounds that the law enforcement officials were guilty themselves of stealing bitcoins and extorting from Ulbricht. The evidence proving this was, of course, withheld in the trial and any favorable pro-Ulbricht evidence was suppressed.
“Ulbricht’s family paints a very different picture of him than federal prosecutors. The family has been waging a campaign to “Free Ross Ulbricht” that accuses the government of framing Ulbricht as part of the “failed War on Drugs,” and depicting his case as a milestone in the government’s crackdown on Internet freedom. Ulbricht’s defense attorneys argued at trial, and in his appeal, that Ulbricht had founded the Silk Road using the pseudonym Dread Pirate Roberts, but that he had sold his stake and was framed by subsequent operators.”
Ulbricht’s family says that the two corrupt agents Shaun Bridges and Carl Force had administrative privileges on Silk Road and would have been able to manipulate information in their favor. They claim the information was withheld when Ulbricht’s case went to court and the government kept it under seal to protect its agents.
Ulbricht and his family have many supporters saying that the two consecutive life terms without parole was too harsh of a punishment. They also claim that Ulbricht’s Fourth Amendment rights were breached.
The US government, however, thinks otherwise. They want to make an example of Ross Ulbricht and send a message to cyber criminals that they cannot hide behind the Dark Web’s invisibility cloak. The Dark Web might be a mask criminals wear, but a light can unmask them.
Whitney Grace, February 17, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
The Long Goodbye of Internet Freedom Heralded by CISA
January 8, 2016
The article on MotherBoard titled Internet Freedom Is Actively Dissolving in America paints a bleak picture of our access to the “open internet.” In spite of the net neutrality win this year, broadband adoption is decreasing, and the number of poor Americans forced to choose between broadband and smartphone internet is on the rise. In addition to these unfortunate trends,
“Congress and President Obama made the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act a law by including it in a massive budget bill (as an extra gift, Congress stripped away some of the few privacy provisions in what many civil liberties groups are calling a “surveillance bill”)… Finally, the FBI and NSA have taken strong stands against encryption, one of the few ways that activists, journalists, regular citizens, and yes, criminals and terrorists can communicate with each other without the government spying.”
What this means for search and for our access to the Internet in general, is yet to be seen. The effects of security laws and encryption opposition will obviously be far-reaching, but at what point do we stop getting the information that we need to be informed citizens?
And when you search, if it is not findable, does the information exist?
Chelsea Kerwin, January 8, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Know Thy Hacker
December 10, 2015
Writer Alastair Paterson at SecurityWeek suggests that corporations and organizations prepare their defenses by turning a hacking technique against the hackers in, “Using an Attacker’s ‘Shadow’ to Your Advantage.” The article explains:
“A ‘digital shadow’ is a subset of a digital footprint and consists of exposed personal, technical or organizational information that is often highly confidential, sensitive or proprietary. Adversaries can exploit these digital shadows to reveal weak points in an organization and launch targeted attacks. This is not necessarily a bad thing, though. Some digital shadows can prove advantageous to your organization; the digital shadows of your attackers. The adversary also casts a shadow similar to that of private and public corporations. These ‘shadows’ can be used to better understand the threat you face. This includes attacker patterns, motives, attempted threat vectors, and activities. Armed with this enhanced understanding, organizations are better able to assess and align their security postures.”
Paterson observes that one need not delve into the Dark Web to discern these patterns, particularly when the potential attacker is a “hactivist” (though one can find information there, too, if one is so bold). Rather, hactivists often use social media to chronicle their goals and activities. Monitoring these sources can give a company clues about upcoming attacks through records like target lists, responsibility claims, and discussions on new hacking techniques. Keeping an eye on such activity can help companies build appropriate defenses.
Cynthia Murrell, December 10, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Linguamatics Clears Copyright
December 1, 2015
What is a researcher’s dream? A researcher’s dream is to be able to easily locate and access viable, full-text resources without having to deal with any copyright issues. One might think that all information is accessible via the Internet and a Google search, but if this is how you think professional research happens then you are sadly mistaken. Most professional articles and journals are locked behind corporate academic walls with barbed wire made from copyright laws.
PR Newswire says in “Linguamatics Expands Cloud Text Mining Platform To Include Full-Text Articles” as way for life science researchers to legally bypass copyright. Linguamatics is a natural language processing text-mining platform and it will now incorporate the Copyright Clearance Center’s new text mining solution RightFind XML. This will allow researchers to have access to over 4,000 peer-reviewed journals from over twenty-five of scientific, technical, and medical publishers.
“The solution enables researchers to make discoveries and connections that can only be found in full-text articles. All of the content is stored securely by CCC and is pre-authorized by publishers for commercial text mining. Users access the content using Linguamatics’ unique federated text mining architecture which allows researchers to find the key information to support business-critical decisions. The integrated solution is available now, and enables users to save time, reduce costs and help mitigate an organization’s copyright infringement risk.”
I can only hope that other academic databases and publishers will adopt a similar and (hopefully) more affordable way to access full-text, viable resources. One of the biggest drawbacks to Internet research is having to rely on questionable source information, because it is free and readily available. Easier access to more accurate information form viable resources will not only improve information, but also start a trend to increase its access.
Whitney Grace, December 1, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
More Bad News for Traditional TV
November 17, 2015
Traditional TV is in a slow decline towards obsoleteness. With streaming options offering more enticing viewing options with less out of pocket expenses and no contracts, why would a person sign on for cable or dish packages that have notoriously bad customer service, commercials, and insane prices? Digital Trends has the most recent information from Nielsen about TV viewing habits, “New Nielsen Study On Streaming Points To More Bad News For Traditional TV.”
Pay-for-TV services have been on the decline for years, but the numbers are huge for the latest Nielsen Total Audience report:
“According to the data, broadband-only homes are up by 52 percent to 3.3 million from 2.2 million year over year. Meanwhile, pay-TV subscriptions are down 1.2 percent to 100.4 million, from 101.6 million at this time last year. And while 1.2 percent may not seem like much, that million plus decline has caused all sorts of havoc on the stock market, with big media companies like Viacom, Nickelodeon, Disney, and many others seeing tumbling stock prices in recent weeks.”
While one might suggest that pay-for-TV services should start the bankruptcy paperwork, there has been a 45% rise in video-on-demand services. Nielsen does not tabulate streaming services, viewership on mobile devices, and if people are watching more TV due to all the options?
While Nielsen is a trusted organization for TV data, information is still collected view paper submission forms. Nielsen is like traditional TV and need to update its offerings to maintain relevancy.
Whitney Grace, November 17, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Google Books Is Not Violating Copyright
November 12, 2015
Google Books was controversial the moment it was conceived. The concept is simple and effective though: books in academic libraries are scanned and snippets are made available online. People have the ability to search Google Books for specific words or phrases, then they are shown where it is contained within a book. The Atlantic wrote, “After Ten Years, Google Books Is Legal” about how a Second Circuit judge panel ruled in favor of Google Books against the Authors Guild.
The panel ruled that Google Books fell under the terms of “Fair Use,” which as most YouTubers know, is the ability to use a piece of copyrighted content within a strict set of rules. Fair usage includes works of parody, academic works, quotations, criticism, or summarization.
The Authors Guild argued that Google Books was infringing upon its members copyrights and stealing potential profits, but anyone knows that too much of a copyright is a bad thing. It places too many limitations on how the work can be used, harming the dissemination of creative and intellectual thought.
“’It gives us a better senses of where fair use lies,” says Dan Cohen, the executive director of the Digital Public Library of America. They “give a firmer foundation and certainty for non-profits…Of all the parts of Judge Leval’s decision, many people I talked to were happiest to see that it stressed that fair use’s importance went beyond any tool, company, or institution. ‘To me, I think a muscular fair use is an overall benefit to society, and I think it helps both authors and readers,’ said Cohen.”
Authors do have the right to have their work copyright and make a profit off it, which should be encouraged and a person’s work should not be given away for free. There is a wealth of information out there, however, that is kept under lock and key and otherwise would not be accessed with a digital form. Google Books only extends a book’s reach, speaking from one who has relied on it for research.
Whitney Grace, November 12, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Pew Report Compares News Sources: Twitter and Facebook
November 6, 2015
As newspapers fall, what is rising to take their place? Why, social media, of course. The Pew Research Center discusses its recent findings on the subject in, “The Evolving Role of News on Twitter and Facebook.” The number of Americans getting their news from these platforms continues to rise, across almost all demographic groups. The article informs us:
“The new study, conducted by Pew Research Center in association with the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, finds that clear majorities of Twitter (63%) and Facebook users (63%) now say each platform serves as a source for news about events and issues outside the realm of friends and family. That share has increased substantially from 2013, when about half of users (52% of Twitter users, 47% of Facebook users) said they got news from the social platforms.”
The write-up describes some ways the platforms differ in their news delivery. For example, more users turn to Twitter for breaking news, while Facebook now features a “Trending” sidebar, filterable by subject. The article notes that these trends can have an important impact on our society:
“As more social networking sites recognize and adapt to their role in the news environment, each will offer unique features for news users, and these features may foster shifts in news use. Those different uses around news features have implications for how Americans learn about the world and their communities, and for how they take part in the democratic process.”
Indeed. See the article for more differences between Facebook and Twitter news consumers, complete with some percentages. You can also see the data’s barebones results in the report’s final topline. Most of the data comes from a survey conducted across two weekends last March, among 2,035 Americans aged 18 and up.
Cynthia Murrell, November 6, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
