Monthly Archives: March 2020

After the shutdown, the testing and tracing. Trace, test and treat is the mantra no lockdowns, no roadblocks and no restriction on movement in South Korea. To suppress and control the epidemic, countries must isolate, test, treat and trace, say WHO.

But what does tracing look like exactly? In Singapore, they use a TraceTogether app, which uses Bluetooth to track nearby phones (without location tracking), keeps local logs of those contacts, and only uploads them to the Ministry of Health when the user chooses/consents, presumably after a diagnosis, so those contacts can be alerted. Singapore plans to open-source the app.

In South Korea, the government texts people to let them know if they were in the vicinity of a diagnosed individual. The information conveyed can include the persons age, gender, and detailed location history. Subsequently, even more details may be made available:

In China, as you might expect, the surveillance is even more pervasive and draconian. Here, the pervasive apps Alipay and WeChat now include health codes green, yellow, or red set by the Chinese government, using opaque criteria. This health status is then used in hundreds of cities (and soon nationwide) to determine whether people are allowed to e.g. ride the subway, take a train, enter a building, or even exit a highway.

What about us, in the rich democratic world? Are we OK with the Chinese model? Of course not. The South Korean model? Probably not. The Singaporean model? Maybe. (I suspect it would fly in my homeland of Canada, for instance.) But the need to install a separate app, with TraceTogether or the directionally similar MIT project Safe Paths, is a problem. It works in a city-state like Singapore but will be much more problematic in a huge, politically divided nation like America. This will lead to inferior data blinded by both noncompliance and selection bias.

More generally, at what point does the urgent need for better data collide with the need to protect individual privacy and avoid enabling the tools for an aspiring, or existing, police state? And lets not kid ourselves; the pandemic increases, rather than diminishes, the authoritarian threat.

Maybe, like the UKs NHS, creators of new pandemic data infrastructures will promise Once the public health emergency situation has ended, data will either be destroyed or returned but not all organizations instill the required level of trust in their populace. This tension has provoked heated discussion around whether we should create new surveillance systems to help mitigate and control the pandemic.

This surprises me greatly. Wherever you may be on that spectrum, there is no sense whatsoever in creating a new surveillance system seeing as how multiple options already exist. We dont like to think about it, much, but the cold fact is that two groups of entities already collectively have essentially unfettered access to all our proximity (and location) data, as and when they choose to do so.

I refer of course to the major cell providers, and to Apple & Google. This was vividly illustrated by data company Tectonix in a viral visualization of the spread of Spring Break partygoers:

Needless to say, Apple and Google, purveyors of the OSes on all those phones, have essentially the same capability as and when they choose to exercise it. An open letter from technologists, epidemiologists & medical professionals calls on Apple, Google, and other mobile operating system vendors (the notion that any other vendors are remotely relevant is adorable) to provide an opt-in, privacy preserving OS feature to support contact tracing.

Theyre right. Android and iOS could, and should, add and roll out privacy-preserving, interoperable, TraceTogether-like functionality at the OS level (or Google Play Services level, to split fine technical hairs.) Granted, this means relying on corporate surveillance, which makes all of us feel uneasy. But at least it doesnt mean creating a whole new surveillance infrastructure. Furthermore, Apple and Google, especially compared to cellular providers, have a strong institutional history and focus on protecting privacy and limiting the remit of their surveillance.

(Dont believe me? Apples commitment to privacy has long been a competitive advantage. Google offers a thorough set of tools to let you control your data and privacy settings. I ask you: where is your cell service providers equivalent? Ah. Do you expect it to ever create one? I see. Would you also be interested in this fine, very lightly used Brooklyn Bridge I have on sale?)

Apple and Google are also much better suited to the task of preserving privacy by anonymizing data sets (I know, I know, but see below), or, better yet, preserving privacy via some form(s) of differential privacy and/or homomorphic encryption or even some kind of zero-knowledge cryptography, he handwaved wildly. And, on a practical level, theyre more able than a third-party app developer to ensure a background service like that stays active.

Obviously this should all be well and firmly regulated. But at the same time, we should remain cognizant of the fact that not every nation believes in such regulation. Building privacy deep into a contact-tracing system, to the maximum extent consonant with its efficacy, is especially important when we consider its potential usage in authoritarian nations who might demand the raw data. Anonymized location datasets admittedly tend to be something of an oxymoron, but authoritarians may still be technically stymied by the difficulty of deanonymization; and if individual privacy can be preserved even more securely than that via some elegant encryption scheme, so much the better.

Compared to the other alternatives government surveillance; the phone companies; or some new app, with all the concomitant friction and barriers to usage Apple and Google are by some distance the least objectionable option. Whats more, in the face of this global pandemic they could roll out their part of the test-and-trace solution to three billion users relatively quickly. If we need a pervasive pandemic surveillance system, then lets use one which (though we dont like to talk about it) already exists, in the least dangerous, most privacy-preserving way.

Go here to read the rest:

Test and trace with Apple and Google - TechCrunch

Mark Zuckerberg, Facebooks chief executive, ordered a lockdown for hundreds of employees late last year.

A lockdown is Facebook-speak for a period of intense, focused effort on a high-priority project. The workers, who included engineers and policy employees, were ordered to drop other projects and build tools to prevent interference in the 2020 election, said two people with knowledge of the instructions.

For Mr. Zuckerberg, who once delegated the messy business of politics to his lieutenants, Novembers election has become a personal fixation. In 2017, after the extent of Russias manipulation of the social network became clear, he vowed to prevent it from happening again.

We wont catch everyone immediately, but we can make it harder to try to interfere, he said.

Facebook has since required anyone running U.S. political ads to submit proof of an American mailing address, and included their ads in a publicly searchable database. It has invested billions to moderate content, drawn up new policies against misinformation and manipulated media, and hired tens of thousands of safety and security workers.

In the 2018 midterm elections, those efforts resulted in a relatively scandal-free Election Day. But 2020 is presenting different challenges.

Last year, lawmakers blasted Mr. Zuckerberg for refusing to fact-check Facebook posts or take down false ads placed by political candidates; he said it would be an affront to free speech. The laissez-faire approach has been embraced by some Republicans, including President Trump, but has made Facebook unpopular among Democrats and civil rights groups.

Still, Facebooks rank-and-file workers are cautiously optimistic. In late January, just before the Iowa caucuses, a group of employees gathered at the companys headquarters for a party to celebrate the end of the lockdown.

Read this article:

Facebook, Google and Twitter Struggle to Handle Novembers Election - The New York Times

Google is one of the few companies that has an impact on almost all of our lives on a daily basis. It's where we go to find the best restaurants when we're traveling. It's where we search for local plumbers, or the closest hardware store, or where to buy vegetables to plant in a garden. That, of course, explains why more than half of all internet traffic originates with Google.

It also explains why Google is such a valuable place for small businesses to find new customers. The combination of organic searchand the paid ads associated with those searches has made it easy for businesses to target their audience based on meeting the exact things they're searching for. It's also made Google a massively profitable trillion-dollar company.

Now, in a blog post by Sundar Pichai, thecompany's CEO, Google says it will pitchin to help small businessesand other organizationsmake their way through the current health and economic challenge facing us all. That help comes in the form of an $800 million program that includes both direct financial assistance, as well as grants.

For small businesses, that means $340 million in credits for Google Ads that the company says can be used throughout 2020 across any of Google's advertising platforms. According to the company, the goal is "to alleviate some of the cost of staying in touch with their customers."

There's no signup or application process. Instead, credits will automatically be added to active Google Ads accounts.

In addition, Google says it is providing $250 million in ad credits to the World Health Organization (WHO), as well as other government health agencies that provide information about slowing the spread of Covid-19. Google had already said it would provide $25 million, but has significantly increased that amount with this announcement.

An additional $200 million will be provided to both NGOs and financial institutions "to help provide small businesses with access to capital." The company says it is focused on "people and communities underserved by mainstream financial institutions."

Lastly, Google is providing $20 million in Google Cloud services to researchers who are studying vaccines and treatment for Covid-19.

It's worth mentioning that Google is reportedly already seeing declines in advertising spending as businesses are forced to temporarily close down in communities across America. There's a chance that many of those businesses will struggle to reopen without help, which gives Google an incentive to help since those businesses are its customers. In addition, a credit is often an effective way to drive additional spending, which helps Google's bottom line at a time when it too could use a boost.

That's not to say that Google shouldn't get credit for these efforts. Google is in a unique position to actually help in a way that matters. Providing small businesses with the combination of advertising help as well as direct financial assistance in some cases could easily mean the difference between some businesses taking a short term hit or getting knocked out.

Preventing that is something we should all get on board with.

Published on: Mar 30, 2020

The opinions expressed here by Inc.com columnists are their own, not those of Inc.com.

Read more here:

Google Unveiled a Massive Stimulus Program of Its Own - Inc.

Google Home is great, but it's not perfect -- some tasks require a workaround.

In the land of digital voice assistants, I love my Google Home ($99 at Walmart),I really do, but that doesn't mean our relationship is perfect. In fact, you could even say the honeymoon phase is pretty much over by now. I'm not saying we need counseling just yet, but my list of pet peeves has grown frustratingly long and it's starting to come across in my attitude when I talk to Google Assistant.

I know they say you should never expect anyone to change just for you, but that's one of the things I love most about Google Assistant --Google is constantly evolving the technology. So maybe I can hold out some hope that things will eventually get better.

Until then, here are my top three Google Home pet peeves what I do to work around them.

"Hey, Google" doesn't exactly roll off the tongue as easily as, say, "Alexa."

The problem: "OK, Google" just feels awkward and clumsy to me, and "Hey, Google" is no better. Don't even get me started on my frustration with Google being the name of the device (Google Home Mini), the AI (Google Assistant), the technology that powers the AI (Google search and services) and the company that owns it all (Google).

The fix: Even though Google won't let you choose a different wake word, you can manipulate Google Home's imperfect ear by using similar-sounding words to summon Google Assistant. "Hey, Boo Boo" remains my go-to, but I've also used "OK, Frugal," "Egg Noodle," "Go Lay Doo-Doo" and my all-time favorite "Cocaine Poodle."

The problem: You canset up a Google Home Routine to do just about anything, but the only way to trigger it is with a voice command. Alexa, on the other hand, lets youcraft location-based triggers, so when you leave the house, for example, Alexa can turn off all the lights, set the thermostat to "away" mode and play Mozart for your cats.

Google Assistant still cannot trigger a routine based on your location, even though Google always knows where you are if you're using Google Maps.

The fix: A good assistant should know whether I'm home or not and behave accordingly, so until Google implements location-based triggers I'm furtively using the Alexa app on my iPhone ($699 at Apple). Whether you have any Amazon Echo ($52 at Amazon) devices or not you candownload the Alexa app and set up location triggers on your Android phone or iPhone.

The problem: Even though phone-makers have all but eliminated the humble 3.5mm headphone jack from smartphones, Amazon Echo devices still have an audio output port for delivering audio to a more capable stereo system. Google Home devices have no such ports, which means the only way to connect them with an external audio source is with Bluetooth.

The fix: I hate to lean on Alexa again, but this works about as well (and for as little money) as anything: I picked up a couple of older second-genEcho Dots ($55 at Walmart) from Amazon Warehouse Deals, which I plugged into two sets of high-quality speakers. From there it's a breeze to connect your Google Home to the Echo Dot with Bluetooth.

Unlike any Google Home speakers, Amazon Echo has an AUX out port.

Just open the Google Home app and tap Settings > Device settings > Default music player > Enable pairing mode. From there, pair your Google speaker with your Amazon speaker to enjoy hi-fidelity sound from your stereo speakers.

Enough with the negativity -- Google Home is still my favorite smart home ecosystem because of the things it does well, likehelping you avoid touching surfaces in your house to slow the spread of germs andproviding accurate up-to-the-minute weather forecasts. And even though you can't connect them to an external stereo, you canpair multiple Google Home smart speakers into a stereo array, which improves their sound tremendously.

Here is the original post:

My top 3 Google Home pet peeves and how to fix them - CNET