Woman Fights Google and Wins

January 21, 2016

Google is one of those big corporations that if you have a problem with it, you might as well let it go.  Google is powerful, respected, and has (we suspect) a very good legal department.  There are problems with Google, such as the “right to be forgotten” and Australian citizens have a big bone to pick with the search engine.  Australian News reports that “SA Court Orders Google Pay Dr. Janice Duffy $115,000 Damages For Defamatory Search Results.”

Duffy filed a lawsuit against Google for displaying her name along with false and defamatory content within its search results.  Google claimed no responsibility for the actual content, as it was not the publisher.  The Australian Supreme Court felt differently:

“In October, the court rejected Google’s arguments and found it had defamed Dr Duffy due to the way the company’s patented algorithm operated.  Justice Malcolm Blue found the search results either published, republished or directed users toward comments harmful to her reputation.  On Wednesday, Justice Blue awarded Dr Duffy damages of $100,000 and a $15,000 lump sum to cover interest.”

Duffy was not the only one who was upset with Google.  Other Australians filed their own complaints, including Michael Trkulja with a claim search results linked him to crime and Shane Radbone sued to learn the identities of bloggers who wrote negative comments.

It does not seem that Google should be held accountable, but technically they are not responsible for the content.  However, Google’s algorithms are wired to bring up the most popular and in-depth results.  Should they develop a filter that measures negative and harmful information or is it too subjective?

 

Whitney Grace, January 21, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

 

The Business World Is Not Prepared for a Cyber Attack

January 12, 2016

Cyber threats have been a concerning topics since computers became functional and daily tools for people.  The idea of a hacker brings up images of IT geeks sitting in a dark basement with their laptops and cracking top secret codes in a matter of keystrokes.  Hacking has turned from a limited crime to a huge international problem comparable to the mafia.  While hackers are interested in targeting individuals, the bolder thieves target big businesses.  News of Bahrain shares that “Biz Not Prepared For Cyber Threat,” translated from headline speech that means the business world would not withstand a cyber attack.

KPMG International released the 2015 KPMG CEO Outlook Study that found businesses are aware of risks associated with cyber attacks, but only forty-nine percent have prepared for one.  The study surveyed 1,200 CEOs and one out of five are concerned about cyber risks.  The concern has led many CEOs to take action with security measures and safety plans.

“ ‘The most innovative companies have recognized that cyber security is a customer experience, not just a risk that needs to be managed or a line item in the budget. In Bahrain, some firms are finding ways to turn cyber preparedness into a competitive advantage with customers, and they are using this as a differentiator.’ ”

Many companies that are attacked thought they were prepared for any threats, but they underestimated hackers’ intelligence, sophistication, and persistence.

Some of the companies with good cyber security are advertising their technical achievements to prevent attacks.  It is a desirable feature, especially as more information is housed on cloud storage and businesses need to be aware of potential threats.

Whitney Grace, January 12, 2016
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

IBMs CFO Reveals IBMs Innovation Strategy: Why Not Ask Watson

January 11, 2016

The article on TechTarget titled IBM CFO Schroeter on the Company’s Innovation Strategy delves into the mind of Martin Schroeter regarding IBM’s strategy for chasing innovation in healthcare and big data. This year alone IBM acquired three healthcare companies with data on roughly one hundred million people as well as massive amounts of data on medical conditions. Additionally, as the article relates,

“IBM’s purchase of The Weather Co.’s data processing and analytics operations brought the company a “massive ingestion machine,” which plays straight into its IoT strategy, Schroeter said. The ingestion system pulls in 4 GB of data per second, he said, and runs a lot of analytics as users generate weather forecasts for their geographies. The Weather Co. system will be the basis for the company’s Internet of Things platform, he said.”

One of many interesting tidbits from the mouth of Schroeter was this gem about companies being willing to “disrupt [themselves]” to ensure updated and long-term strategies that align technological advancement with business development. The hurtling pace of technology has even meant IBM coming up with a predictive system to speed up the due diligence process during acquisitions. What once took weeks to analyze and often lost IBM deals has now been streamlined to a single day’s work. Kaboom.

 

Chelsea Kerwin, January 11, 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

Did Apple Buy Topsy for an Edge over Google

January 7, 2016

A couple years ago, Apple bought Topsy Labs, a social analytics firm and Twitter partner out of San Francisco. Now, in “Apple Inc. Acquired Topsy to Beat Google Search Capabilities,” BidnessEtc reports on revelations from Topsy’s former director of business development, Aaron Hayes-Roth. Writer Martin Blanc reveals:

“The startup’s tools were considered to be fast and reliable by the customers who used them. The in-depth analysis was smart enough to go back to 2006 and provide users with analytics and data for future forecasts. Mr. Roth and his team always had a curiosity attached to how Apple would use Twitter in its ecosystem. Apple does not make use of Twitter that much; the account was made in 2011 and there aren’t many tweets that come out of the social network. However, Mr. Roth explains that it was not Twitter data that Apple had its eye on; it was the technology that powered it. The architecture of Topsy makes it easier for systems to search large amounts of data extremely fast with impressive indexing capabilities. Subsequently, Apple’s ecosystem has developed quite a lot since Siri was first introduced with the iPhone 4s. The digital assistant and the Spotlight search are testament to how far Apple’s search capabilities have come.”

The article goes on to illustrate some of those advances, then points out the ongoing rivalry between Apple and Google. Are these improvements the result of Topsy’s tech? And will they give Apple the edge they need over their adversary? Stay tuned.

 

Cynthia Murrell, January 7, 2016

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

IBM and Yahoo Hard at Work on Real-Time Data Handling

January 7, 2016

The article titled What You Missed in Big Data: Real-time Intelligence on SiliconAngle speaks to the difficulties of handling the ever-increasing volumes of real-time data for corporations. Recently, IBM created supplementary stream process services including a machine learning engine that comes equipped with algorithm building capabilities. The algorithms aid in choosing relevant information from the numerous connected devices of a single business. The article explains,

“An electronics manufacturer, for instance, could use the service to immediately detect when a sensor embedded in an expensive piece of equipment signals a malfunction and automatically alert the nearest technician. IBM is touting the functionality as a way to cut through the massive volume of machine-generated signals produced every second in such environments, which can overburden not only analysts but also the technology infrastructure that supports their work.”

Yahoo has been working on just that issue, and lately open-sourced its engineers’ answer. In a demonstration to the press, the technology proved able to power through 100 million vales in under three seconds. Typically, such a high number would require two and a half minutes. The target of this sort of technology is measuring extreme numbers like visitor statistics. Accuracy takes a back seat to speed through estimation, but at such a speed it’s worth the sacrifice.

Chelsea Kerwin, January 7, 2016

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

Google Search and Cultural Representation

January 6, 2016

Google Search has worked its way into our culture as an indispensable, and unquestioned, tool of modern life. However, the algorithms behind the platform have become more sophisticated, allowing Google to tinker more and more with search results. Since so many of us regularly use the search engine to interact with the outside world, Google’s choices (and ours) affect the world’s perception of itself. Researcher Safiya Umoja Noble details some of the adverse effects of this great power in her paper, “Google Search: Hyper-Visibility as a Means of Rendering Black Women and Girls Invisible,” posted at the University of Rochester’s InVisible Culture journal. Not surprisingly, commerce features prominently in the story. Noble writes:

“Google’s algorithmic practices of biasing information toward the interests of the powerful elites in the United States,14 while at the same time presenting its results as generated from objective factors, has resulted in a provision of information that perpetuates the characterizations of women and girls through misogynist and pornified websites. Stated another way, it can be argued that Google functions in the interests of its most influential (i.e. moneyed) advertisers or through an intersection of popular and commercial interests. Yet Google’s users think of it as a public resource, generally free from commercial interest15—this fact likely bolstered by Google’s own posturing as a company for whom the informal mantra, ‘Don’t be evil,’ has functioned as its motivational core. Further complicating the ability to contextualize Google’s results is the power of its social hegemony.16  At the heart of the public’s general understanding and trust in commercial search engines like Google, is a belief in the neutrality of technology … which only obscures our ability to understand the potency of misrepresentation that further marginalizes and renders the interests of Black women, coded as girls, invisible.”

Noble goes on to note ways we, the users, codify our existing biases through our very interaction with Google Search. To say the paper treats these topic in depth is an understatement. Noble provides enough background on the study of culture’s treatment of Black women and girls to get any non-social-scientist up to speed. Then, she describes the extension of that treatment onto the Web, and how certain commercial enterprises now depend on those damaging representations. Finally, the paper calls for a critical approach to search to address these, and similar, issues. It is an important, and informative, paper; we suggest interested readers give it a gander.

 

Cynthia Murrell, January 6, 2016

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

 

How Big Data Is Missing the Mark

January 5, 2016

At this point in the Big Data sensation, many businesses are swimming in data without the means to leverage it effectively. TechWeek Europe cites a recent survey from storage provider Pure Storage in its write-up, “Big Data ‘Fails Businesses’ Due to Access, Skills Shortage.” Interestingly, most of the problems seem to have more to do with human procedures and short-sightedness than any technical shortcomings. Writer Tom Jowitt lists the three top obstacles as a lack of skilled workers, limited access to information, and bureaucracy. He tells us:

“So what exactly is going wrong with Big Data to be causing such problems? Well over half (56 percent) of respondents said bureaucratic red tape was the most serious obstacle for business productivity. ‘Bureaucratic red tape around access to information is preventing companies from using their data to find those unique pieces of insight that lead to great ideas,’ said [Pure Storage’s James] Petter. ‘Data ownership is no longer just the remit of the CIO, the democratisation of insight across businesses enables them to disrupt the competition.’ But regulations are also causing worry, with one in ten of the companies citing data protection concerns as holding up their dissemination of information and data throughout their business. The upcoming EU General Data Protection Regulation will soon affect every single company that stores data.”

The survey reports that missed opportunities have cost businesses billions of pounds per year, and almost three-quarters of respondents say their organizations collect data that is just collecting dust. Both cost and time are reasons that information remains unprocessed. On the other hand, Jowitt points to another survey by CA Technologies; most of its respondents expect the situation to improve, and for their data collections to bring profits down the road. Let us hope they are correct.

 

Cynthia Murrell, January 5, 2016

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

Rethinking the J.D. As Artificial Intelligence Takes over Lawyers Work

January 5, 2016

The article titled Report: Artificial Intelligence Will Cause “Structural Collapse” of Law Firms by 2030 on Legal Futures posits that AI will take over legal practice in the near future. Jomati Consultants LLP released the report “Civilization 2030: The Near Future for Law Firms” which estimates that as population growth slows, legal work will be directed mainly toward the arena of geriatric advice and litigation. The article states,

“The report’s focus on the future of work contained the most disturbing findings for lawyers… By [2030], ‘bots’ could be doing “low-level knowledge economy work” and soon much more. “Eventually each bot would be able to do the work of a dozen low-level associates. They would not get tired. They would not seek advancement. They would not ask for pay rises. Process legal work would rapidly descend in cost.” The human part of lawyering would shrink.”

The article goes on in great detail about who will be affected. Partners will come out on top (no surprises there) but associates, particularly those doing billable work rather than client-facing work, will be in much less demand. This may be difficult for the hoards of young law school students produced each year as their positions are increasingly taken over by AI technology. Time to rethink that law degree and consider a career path tailored to human skills.

Chelsea Kerwin, January 5, 2016

Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

 

Overhyped Science Stuff

December 30, 2015

After Christmas, comes New Year’s Eve and news outlets take the time to reflect on the changes in the past year.  Usually they focus on celebrities who died, headlining news stories, technology advancements, and new scientific discoveries.  One of the geeky news outlets on the Internet is Gizmodo  and they took their shot at highlighting things that happened in 2015, but rather than focusing on new advances they check off “The Most Overhyped Scientific Discoveries In 2015.”

There was extreme hype about an alien megastructure in outer space that Neil deGrasse Tyson had to address and tell folks they were overreacting.  Bacon and other processed meats were labeled as carcinogens and caused cancer!  The media, of course, took the bacon link and ran with it causing extreme panic, but in the long run everything causes cancer from cellphones to sugar.

Global warming is a hot topic that always draws arguments and it appears to be getting worse the more humans release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.  Humans are always ready for a quick solution and a little ice age would rescue Earth.  It would be brought on by diminishing solar activity, but it turns out carbon dioxide pollution does more damage than solar viability can fix.  Another story involved the nearly indestructible tardigrades and the possibility of horizontal gene transfer, but a dispute between two rival labs about research on tardigrades ruined further research to understanding the unique creature.

The biggest overblown scientific discovery, in our opinion, is NASA’s warp drive.  Humans are desperate for breakthroughs in space travel, so we can blast off to Titan’s beaches for a day and then come home within our normal Earth time.  NASA experimented with an EM Drive:

“Apparently, the engineers working on the EM Drive decided to address some of the skeptic’s concerns head-on this year, by re-running their experiments in a closed vacuum to ensure the thrust they were measuring wasn’t caused by environmental noise. And it so happens, new EM Drive tests in noise-free conditions failed to falsify the original results. That is, the researchers had apparently produced a minuscule amount of thrust without any propellant.

Once again, media reports made it sound like NASA was on the brink of unveiling an intergalactic transport system.”

NASA might be working on warp drive prototype, but the science is based on short-term experiments, none of it has been peer reviewed, and NASA has not claimed that the engine even works.

The media takes the idea snippets and transforms them into overblown news pieces that are based more on junk science than real scientific investigation.

 

Whitney Grace, December 30, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph

« Previous PageNext Page »

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta