Google: The Misinformation Search Engine

The Decline of Google Integrity.

Google has committed the cardinal sin of search engines. It is returning skewed results based on the Social Justice Warrior (SJW) biases of its workforce. A search engine whose results can no longer be trusted to be impartial, has no value. I believe Google has reached that tipping point today.

I used to love Google. I bought into their promise to: “Don’t be evil”. Unfortunately, the old saying that “Absolute power corrupts absolutely” appears to be true with them. As they achieved monopoly status in the search field, they decided that buckets of money was no longer enough. Now, they would use their search-engine-might to spread their SJW ideologies to the world, and to suppress ideas they don’t agree with. This is totally unacceptable.

Google’s new YouTube Policy will also hide videos that they disagree with. According to the new policy, “The videos will remain on YouTube behind an interstitial, won’t be recommended, won’t be monetized, and won’t have key features including comments, suggested videos, and likes.”

So the videos that Google doesn’t agree with will be invisible, unless you have a direct link to them, and the video creator will not be eligible for financial compensation. Wonderful.

Even worse, if you search for these videos, you may be redirected to videos that support Google’s political views. As they state it: “When people search for sensitive keywords on YouTube, they will be redirected towards a playlist of curated YouTube videos that directly confront and debunk violent extremist messages.” Based on changes I’ve seen with conservative content on YouTube, Google considers any conservative opinions to fall under that category.

Google Thought Police Are Watching You

Google has become infested with SJW’s. I think SJW’s are particularly insidious because they pretend to be diverse and inclusive, when in reality, they oppose diversity of thought, and would exclude anyone who doesn’t agree with their ideas.

They are unwilling to discuss or debate any opposing ideas. Their first defense mechanism seems to be to call out anyone who disagrees with them as hateful, a racist, a bigot, or some other nasty appellation.

Recently, Google has been in the midst of a scandal over the leak of an internal document created by Google employee James Damore, which they called an “Anti-Diversity” memo. It is anything but an anti-diversity memo. To quote from the memo:

“I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes. When addressing the gap in representation in the population, we need to look at population level differences in distributions. If we can’t have an honest discussion about this, then we can never truly solve the problem. Psychological safety is built on mutual respect and acceptance, but unfortunately our culture of shaming and misrepresentation is disrespectful and unaccepting of anyone outside its echo chamber. “

It calls out for diversity of thought, and for open discussion of ideas. Google’s reaction to this memo is telling. James Damore, was fired. He dared express a different opinion. He proposed ideas which upset the Google group-think. He didn’t threaten anyone with violence. He just asked for an open discussion of ideas.

But the internal SJW response from Google was marked with violent threats and refusal to even discuss the ideas that James presented, which were supported by scientific research that he cited in his memo.

One Google Employee, “Defending Cville”, tweeted: “I would just walk to his desk and beat the sh*t out of him”. Why is she still an employee, while James Damore was fired? What a wonderful place Google must be to work, where people want to physically assault you for disagreeing with them.

In fact, at least one engineer was punched in retaliation for something he posted. This interview with a previous Google employee, confirms not only the violence, but the blacklisting and discrimination that is rampant by the SJW’s at Google: “I know at least one engineer did get punched in retaliation for something he posted — I am sure he will corroborate this to you directly.”

Another Google employee, Colm Buckley, tweeted “there are certain ‘alternative views, including political views’, which I do not want people to feel safe to share here…”. He also stated that “Yes, this is ‘silencing’. I intend to silence these views.”

Yet another Google employee, Anthony Baxter, tweeted: “I will absolutely go out of my way to make sure I never work with anyone involved with or who endorsed that garbage”.

There are many other examples, you can read for yourself at Breitbart.

Internally, SJW managers at Google are bragging about blacklisting those who disagree with their political views:

Adam Fletcher of Google will not tolerate differing views, stating:

  • I will never, ever hire/transfer you onto my team. Ever. I don’t care if you are perfect fit, or technically excellent or whatever.
  • I will actively not work with you, even to the point where your team or product is impacted by this decision. I’ll communicate why to your manager if it comes up.
  • You’re being blacklisted by people at companies outside of Google. You might not have been aware of this, but people know, people talk. There are always social consequences.

If true, the “blacklisted by people at other companies” comment is a chilling indictment of the culture at Silicon Valley companies today.

There are numerous examples of the hostile work culture that you can read here.

Apparently, some SJW snowflakes at Google were so upset reading the memo, they stayed home from work the next day.

Are these people even adults? I’m surprised Google wasn’t handing out crayons and coloring books, like many institutions did after the 2016 election. Sheesh.

Google Has Lost Our Trust

March On Google

I encourage you to read the memo. Whether you agree or not with the author’s conclusions, he just seems to be explaining his position, for which he had done considerable research, and just asked to discuss the issue.

This is what is so disturbing about the SJW’s today. They refuse to even have a discussion with you. In fact, Google looks very similar to a cult, where people are afraid to disagree with the group think, for fear of being physically or verbally abused, ostracized, and harassed.

Google is hiring people based on diversity rather than ability. They are filtering search results which don’t match their own ideas. They are monetarily punishing YouTube authors which disagree with their viewpoints. Google is hostile to their own employees who may have differing beliefs. People are afraid to speak out. Google is trying to excise any different opinions from the Internet.

This is not a company that can be trusted to be the sole gatekeeper to the Internet. I’ve stopped using Google Search, and am now using Bing and DuckDuckGo as alternatives. The Internet must not be filtered to only display certain ideas. Even if you agree with Google’s positions today, someday they may diverge from your current world view, and you too may fall victim to Google’s abuse of power.

Protests are being planned outside of Google offices across the country on August 19, 2017. If you feel that it is imperative that our Internet Search must remain impartial, please consider joining the protest. You can find more information at MarchOnGoogle.

Microsoft UWP – The Un-Wanted Platform

UWP Devices

Microsoft UWP – Field of Dreams.

They say, if you build it, they will come. But they didn’t come. That’s the dilemma that Microsoft UWP (Universal Windows Platform) faces. Despite throwing the full resources of Microsoft into building a platform that supports mobile, tablets and traditional PC’s, developers and users have remained indifferent to the offering. The problem is that it came too late, and more importantly, it came after a number of crushing missteps by Microsoft along the way.

Early Success

Microsoft has been trying to react to the foundational shift in the industry, ever since the iPhone came out in 2007 and changed the computing landscape. This is ironic, since Microsoft was an early player in the mobile landscape, starting with early so-called Personal Data Assistants (PDA’s) as early as 2000, with their Pocket PC. By 2002, Windows was being used on non-touch screen smartphones. Microsoft had early success in that area, and a 42% market share at its peak in 2007.

Blind-sided by iPhone

That peak coincides with the launch in 2007 of Apple’s first iPhone. At the time, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer laughed it off saying: “Five hundred dollars? Fully subsidized? With a plan? That is the most expensive phone in the world. And it doesn’t appeal to business customers because it doesn’t have a keyboard, which makes it not a very good email machine.”

Within a year, Microsoft’s share of the smartphone market had dropped from its peak of 42% down to 27%. Microsoft tried to differentiate its product by introducing a new tiled interface called Metro with Windows Phone 7. The new interface had its share of fans, but didn’t really stop the bleeding.

Microsoft then started down a road of alienating nearly every one of its fans in a series of missteps intended to herd customers back to the Microsoft fold. Windows Phone 7 users were left in the dust when Windows Phone 8 was introduced. Microsoft was unable to offer an upgrade path, because the OS had been rewritten to use the Windows NT kernel (Windows Phone 7 was based on Windows CE).

Attack of the iPad

This appears to have been caused by a change in direction by Microsoft after the success of the iPad’s 2010 introduction. Microsoft began down the path of moving its phone and desktop operating systems to using more and more of a common code-base. At the same time, Microsoft released the Surface RT tablet, to counter the iPad threat. Like the new Windows Phone, the Surface RT tablet used the Metro interface. The phone and tablets were restricted to using a new WinRT API Interface, which was a crippled subset of the functionality available in full-blown windows.

Microsoft Tries Clubbing Users Into Submission

Having alienated all of its loyal Windows Phone supporters, Microsoft moved on to alienate its remaining Windows customer base with Windows 8. Windows 8 moved the metro interface to the Windows PC platform and tried to relegate the desktop interface to second-class citizen status.
The preferred applications on Windows 8 were to restrict themselves to the WinRT API, which prevented access to most Windows API functions, and were limited to full screen applications.

The tiled-interface which might have been effective on a 4-inch phone, was absurd on a desktop PC running on a 22-inch or larger monitor. All of the bundled Windows applications became WinRT-based, full screen apps. The most ridiculous example of this force-fit was the Windows calculator, which only ran full screen, and had buttons so large, you could use the palm of your hand to press them.

Since Microsoft was failing in the phone and tablet markets, they apparently decided to leverage their desktop PC operating system monopoly. They would force the Metro interface and crippled WinRT API on their desktop PC user base, in spite of how poorly suited it was for the desktop PC user. Apparently, they thought the desktop users would fall in love with the interface that had been forced on them, and look for tablets and phones with a similar interface. Unfortunately, since the interface was so ill-suited for PC’s, all it did was alienate its most loyal customers.

Stripped Features

Some of the Windows features, such as the transparent “Aero” features were stripped from the OS, apparently because they were too resource intensive for mobile devices. Desktop PC users were left with an ugly, flat windows look-and-feel. Presumably, because of the small phone size and resource limitations, Microsoft moved from traditional icons to LARGE simplistic tiles, that look horrible on a PC screen. Seriously, these look like they were drawn by a four year old child.

Microsoft also removed the beloved and highly customizable Start menu from Windows, and replaced it with the ill-suited menu from Windows Phone. The new menu was fine on a phone where you might only have a few apps, but many PC users have dozens of applications, and the new menu made accessing them a chore.

App Store Angers Developers

Microsoft also introduced an Application Store to compete with the hugely successful Apple Store. Microsoft would take a 30% cut from any applications sold through their store. While this was the same percentage charged by Apple, PC developers hated the idea and avoided the store in droves. Partially, because they were used to selling desktop applications directly to users, but also because the WinRT APIs were so limiting that most existing PC applications couldn’t run as WinRT applications.

The Decline and Fall of WinRT

Perhaps Microsoft thought by cramming the WinRT app model down their captive Windows customer’s throats, that those customers would fall in love with the ill-suited new app model and interface, and start buying the poorly selling Windows phones and Surface RT tablets.

The Windows phone continued to bleed market share, and the Surface RT tablet flopped badly, causing Microsoft to take a $900 million dollar write down. In addition, Microsoft’s customers strongly rejected Windows 8, resulting in a 14% drop in PC Sales. Microsoft admitted defeat, and reverted many of the Windows 8 changes with Windows 10.

They also introduced the Universal Windows Platform (UWP). This is essentially a continuation of the WinRT model, but with some important differences. With UWP, applications can use platform-specific API’s, and the core WinRT API list has been further expanded. The expanded core API’s will make it more feasible for apps to target multiple targets (PC, Tablet, or Phone). However, it begs the question, why would a desktop developer want to bother?UWP seems to be built with a three-legged stool in mind (PC, Tablet and Phone).

A Wobbly Stool

Microsoft has seemingly abandoned the non-Intel tablet market. They have had success with their Intel-based Surface Tablets. However, those will run full-powered desktop applications, so it remains unclear what benefit UWP brings to a Surface user. Anything available as a UWP application almost certainly has a more powerful desktop application already available. So that seems to remove one leg from the UWP stool.

Windows Phone has been in free fall, with current market share at less than 1%. Microsoft has written off $7.6 Billion from an initial $7.2 Billion acquisition of Nokia, and cut 7,800 jobs in its phone business. In spite of its protests to the contrary, it is unclear that Microsoft will continue to sink money in Windows phone. Certainly, one has to question why a developer would bother to target a phone with less than 1% market share. That seems to cut off another leg from the UWP stool.

We Need This, Why?

That leaves our sad UWP stool with a single leg—the Desktop PC. And why should the desktop developer target UWP? If they do so, they will have to pay Microsoft 30% of their revenue, and they have to restrict themselves to a subset of the API unless they want to restrict their platform reach to PC’s. And if they are only targeting PC’s, why not use the full Win32 API?

The only reason that I can see, is for the UWP Application Model. By deploying the application as a UWP app, Microsoft will manage the deployment and updates to the application, and ensure that the application can be removed by the user. For this service, Microsoft will take a 30% cut of the take. If users demand their apps be UWP-flavored, maybe it can take off. But so far, on Windows Phone and Surface RT, users have voted “No thanks” with their wallets.

If nothing else, this promises to make a great case study for business schools, and it should be fun to watch Microsoft try to balance on a one-legged stool.

17 Year Cicadas Invade Northeast Ohio!

17 Year Cicadas are here!

It looks like 2016 is the year of the locust in Northeast Ohio! Well, actually, it’s the year of the 17 year cicadas. I remember them from when I was a kid, and back then we called them the 17 year locusts. I do remember them being everywhere, with their shells literally covering the ground like a carpet in places.

I’ve lived out of state until recently, but it looks like I returned to Ohio at the right time, because we have been invaded by Cicadas.

The first thing I noticed was small finger-sized holes all over the ground. I had heard we were supposed to be getting the cicadas this year, so I did some Googling to confirm it.

The Life of the 17 Year Cicadas

I learned that the Cicadas start out life as eggs laid on the limbs of a tree. When the eggs hatch, the white cicada young will feast on the fluids from the tree. This often causes some damage to the tree. Perhaps it is because of this damage that people often refer to then as locusts, even though they are actually in the cricket family.

When they have matured sufficiently, the cicadas drop to the ground. Then, they burrow into the ground to find some roots to feast on. They will stay underground for 17 years tunneling and feeding off of roots.

After 17 years they will emerge when the right conditions are met. This is usually when the soil temperatures reach 64 degrees Fahrenheit at a depth of 8 inches.

The holes shown in the picture are the exit holes they have dug to begin their adult life above ground. After they emerge, they shed their exoskeleton. These are the shells that litter the ground below trees. I’ve also seen a large number of the shells still attached to tree leaves.

Once they shed their exoskeleton, they begin their brief two week life as an adult, looking for a mate to repeat the cycle. The loud noise is made by the males trying to attract a mate. An individual cicada can reach 110 decibels if heard near your ear. I can say that at times, the sound in my neighborhood is almost at the painful level. There is strength in numbers, and cicada populations can reach 1.5 million per square acre!

Cicada Song

Why 17 Years?

There doesn’t seem to be a definitive answer to why they have the 17 year cycle. One theory is that because they have no defensive mechanisms that they appear en masse so they can survive attacks by predators. The 17 year cycle is presumed to prevent the predator population to swell because of the extra food they provide in the year they emerge. After 17 years without the extra cicada to feast on, the predator population will have presumably returned to normal size.

I can say, that even though they don’t bite, they get annoying after a week or two. They have a bad habit of confusing you for trees and landing on you. When you brush them off, they make a loud screeching sound. The first time one landed on the back of my neck and I brushed it off, the shrieking scared me half to death.

The sound of the cicadas seem to be on the decline, so I suspect the population is dropping now. They are expected to be gone by the first week in July.

Photo Gallery

References

Here are some sites that have everything you ever wanted to know about cicadas, and more.

Apple Abandons iAd, Unexpected Benefits for Google

Apple Inc. has announced that it is abandoning support for iAd on June 30, 2016. Developers will continue to earn revenue until that date. After that date, Apple will stop serving ads, and will provide a final payout of earnings to developers in September of 2016.

iAd was Apple’s mobile advertising platform for iOS devices like iPhone and iPad. Developers could incorporate simple iOS API’s in their mobile applications, and have ads served up by Apple. Developers received a share of the revenue produced by the ads with Apple.

According to Apple, the API’s are being deprecated, but should not cause developer’s applications to crash. Ads will simply stop being served.

Apple’s original announcement in January was very brief and did not make it clear if the API’s would serve ads from third parties. It did not seem clear from the initial posts that the change would affect developers. It sounded like iAd would still present third party ads, but that Apple was getting out of the business of soliciting and selling ads directly.

More recent posts from Apple have made it clear that this is not the case, and the API’s will no longer serve up ads, and that the API’s have, in fact, been deprecated.

Why is Apple Doing This?

Apple has apparently been unable to grow its market share in the mobile advertising business from around the 5% level, in spite of the fact that the iOS platform accounts for more than half of the mobile advertising market. In fact, it is reported that 75% of Google’s mobile ad earnings come from the iOS market.

There has been speculation that Apple, unable to grow its market share, in spite of the flourishing ad market for iOS, has decided on a new ad-free strategy, as a way to counter Google.

Consequences for Apple?

Whatever the reason, I think this is a mistake for Apple. Even if iAd was losing money, which I’m not sure it was, it is a drop in the bucket for Apple. iAd was, however, a very simple means of monetizing apps for developers, and the ads were served in a customer-friendly way.

It was a way to make the iOS platform more favorable to developers. It kept the developer in the Apple ecosystem.

Now those developers will seek a new ad platform. Most likely, it will be Google AdMob, since it is the leader in that space. Now, that ad revenue is going to one of their biggest competitors. And developers are being exposed to a small part of the Google ecosystem. That may be the “foot in the door” for Google to get those iOS-exclusive developers to finally make the jump to also support Android. It is certainly making me revisit this question.