Forget Watson, the Red Hat acquisition may be the thing that saves IBM

With its recent $34 billion buy of Red Hat, IBM may have found something more elementary than” Watson” to save its pennant business.

Though the acquisition of Red Hat is by no means a guaranteed win for the Armonk, N.Y.-based computing corporation that has had more downs than ups over the five years, it seems to be a better bet for “Big Blue” than an artificial intelligence platform that was always more hype than reality.

IBM to buy Red Hat for $34 B in money and debt, taking a bigger change into hybrid cloud

https://techcrunch.com/2018/10/28/ibm-to-buy-red-hat-for-34b-in-cash-and-debt-taking-a-bigger-leap-into-hybrid-cloud/embed/#?secret=SLK4YDdYsU

Indeed, commentators are already noting that this may be a case where IBM lastly hangs up the Watson hat and returns to the enterprise software and services business that has always been its core competency( albeit one that has been weighted far better heavily on consulting services — to the detriment of the company’s business ).

Watson, the business discord concentrate on neural networks whose public affirms were always more market than actually market-driven, has not performed as well as IBM had hoped and investors were “losing ones” patience.

Critics — including psychoanalysts at the asset bank Jefferies( as early as one year ago) — were skeptical of Watson’s ability to deliver IBM from its business woes.

As we wrote at the time 😛 TAGEND

Jefferies drags from an audit of such partnerships between IBM Watson and MD Anderson as a case study for IBM’s broader difficulties scaling Watson. MD Anderson cut its ties with IBM after consuming $60 million on a Watson project that was ultimately deemed, “not ready for human investigational or clinical use.”

The MD Anderson nightmare doesn’t stand on its own. I regularly hear from startup founders in the AI space that their own financial services and biotech purchasers have had similar suffers working with IBM.

The narrative isn’t an expression of the results of any single malfunction, but preferably research results of overhyped marketing, shortfalls in operating with deep learning and GPUs and intensive data readying demands.

Jefferies holds IBM Watson a Wall Street world check

https://techcrunch.com/2017/07/13/jefferies-gives-ibm-watson-a-wall-street-reality-check/embed/#?secret=kAzHLpohWu

That’s not the only hardship IBM has had with Watson’s healthcare develops. Earlier this year, the online medical publication Stat reported that Watson was handing clinicians to recommend cancer treatments “thats been”” unsafe and mistaken” — based on the training data it had received from the company’s own engineers and doctors at Sloan-Kettering who were working with the technology.

All of these woes were reflected in the company’s latest earnings bawl where it reported falling incomes mainly from the Cognitive Solutions business, which includes Watson’s artificial intelligence and supercomputing assistances. Though IBM premier financial officer pointed to “mid-to-high” single toe growth from Watson’s health business in the quarter, transaction processing application business fell by 8% and the company’s suite of hosted application assistances is mostly an afterthought for business gravitating to Microsoft, Alphabet, and Amazon for cloud services.

To be sure, Watson is only one of the segments that IBM had been hoping to tap for its own future rise; and while it was a huge investment orbit for the company, the company ever had its attentions partly fastened on the gloom calculating context as it looked for the regions of growth.

It’s this area of cloud calculating where IBM hopes that Red Hat can help it gain ground.

“The acquisition of Red Hat is a game-changer. It changes everything about the gloom market, ” said Ginni Rometty, IBM Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, in the following statement announcing their purchases. “IBM is increasingly becoming the world’s number-one hybrid cloud provider, offering companies the only open cloud solution that will unlock the full value of the gloom for their businesses.”

The acquisition too sets an incredible amount of selling supremacy behind Red Hat’s many open generator services business — passing all of those IBM project managers and consultants brand-new projects to pitch and perhaps juicing open root software adoption a bit more aggressively in the enterprise.

As Red Hat chief executive Jim Whitehurst told TheStreet in September ,” The large-hearted secular driver of Linux is that large-hearted data workloads run on Linux. AI workloads run on Linux. DevOps and those programmes, almost exclusively Linux ,” he said.” So much of the net new workloads that are being built have an attraction for Linux .”

Read more:

Docker has raised $92 million in new funding

Docker, the company that did more to create today’s modern containerized computing environment than any other independent company, has raised $92 million of a targeted $192 million funding round, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The new funding is a signal that while Docker may have lost its race with Google’s Kubernetes over whose toolkit would be the most widely adopted, the San Francisco-based company has become the champion for businesses that want to move to the modern hybrid application development and information technology operations model of programming.

To understand the importance of containers in modern programming it may help to explain what they are. Put simply, they’re virtual application environments that don’t require an operating system to work. In the past, this type of functionality would have been created using virtual machines, which included software and an operating system.

Containers, by contrast, are more efficient.

Because they only contain the application and the libraries, frameworks, etc. they depend on, you can put lots of them on a single host operating system. The only operating system on the server is that one host operating system and the containers talk directly to it. That keeps the containers small and the overhead extremely low.

WTF is a container?

https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/16/wtf-is-a-container/embed/#?secret=gfaEISMIgI

Enterprises are quickly moving to containers as they are looking to improve how they develop and manage software — and do so faster. But they can’t do that alone and need partners like Docker to help them make that transition.

What many people miss is that Docker is far more than the container orchestration layer — Kubernetes won that war — but a full toolchain for building and managing those containers.

With every open-source project, technology companies are quick to adopt (and adapt) the open-source project and be well-versed with how to use it. More mainstream big businesses that aren’t quite as tech-savvy will turn to a company like Docker to help them manage projects developed with the toolkits.

It’s the natural evolution of a technology startup that serves big business customers to become uninteresting while they become more profitable. Enterprises use them. They make money. The hype is gone. Because once a company sells to a big enterprise customer, they stick with that vendor forever.

When Docker’s founder and former chief executive, Solomon Hykes, left the company earlier this year, he acknowledged as much:

… Docker has quietly transformed into an enterprise business with explosive revenue growth and a developer community in the millions, under the leadership of our CEO, the legendary Steve Singh. Our strategy is simple: every large enterprise in the world is preparing to migrate their applications and infrastructure to the cloud, en masse. They need a solution to do so reliably and securely, without expensive code or process changes, and without locking themselves to a single operating system or cloud. Today the only solution meeting these requirements is Docker Enterprise Edition. This puts Docker at the center of a massive growth opportunity. To take advantage of this opportunity, we need a CTO by Steve’s side with decades of experience shipping and supporting software for the largest corporations in the world. So I now have a new role: to help find that ideal CTO, provide the occasional bit of advice, and get out of the team’s way as they continue to build a juggernaut of a business. As a shareholder, I couldn’t be happier to accept this role.

With the money, it’s likely that Docker will ramp up its sales and marketing staff to start generating the kind of revenue numbers it needs to go out for a public offering in 2019. The company has built up a slate of independent directors (in another clear sign that it’s trying to open a window for its exit into the public markets).

Docker is already a “unicorn” worth well over $1 billion. The last time Docker reportedly raised capital was back in late 2017, when The Wall Street Journal uncovered a filing document from the Securities and Exchange Commission indicating that the company had raised $60 million of a targeted $75 million round. Investors at the time included AME Cloud Ventures, Benchmark, Coatue Management, Goldman Sachs and Greylock Partners. At the time, that investment valued the company at $1.3 billion.

We’ve reached out to the company for comment and will update this post when we hear back.

Read more: https://techcrunch.com/2018/10/15/docker-has-raised-92-million-in-new-funding/

Carefully crafted indictment of 12 Russian spies heaps pressure on Trump

The US deputy attorney generals duration coincided with the president meeting the Queen

It was an extraordinary split-screen moment. On one back, president Donald Trump fulfilling the Queen at Windsor Castle and strolling past a ceremonial sentry of red-uniformed beefeaters. On the other, the US deputy attorney general, Rod Rosenstein, was simultaneously indicting 12 Russian spies for hacking and divulging the emails of elderly Democrat during the 2016 presidential election campaign.

These recent prosecutions by the special prosecutor, Robert Mueller, were carefully crafted. Its timing seems distinctly mischievous. And it heaps distres on Trump ahead of his meeting on Monday in Helsinki with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, the three men to whom the GRU intelligence agency and its generals ultimately answer.

For two years, Trump has equivocated in the face of a simple question: did Moscow hack the US election in order to help him become president and to detriment Hillary Clinton? Despite evidence from US intelligence agencies, he has variously accused a “400-pound guy” sitting on a berth, advocated the answer is vaguely unknowable and said he could not be sure if “its been” Russia or China.

But Mueller’s latest prosecutions lay out the facts in granular detail. The document describes how groupings of profession Russian snoops working out of an anonymous classical building in center Moscow systematically hacked into the Democratic National Committee. It was a textbook ruse procedure, featuring bogus persons, concealed cryptocurrency pays and easy-to-do spear phishing.

During his meeting with Putin on Monday, Trump could challenge the extradition of the 12 GRU policemen, who, it is now known, include Viktor Borisovich Netyksho, the person in charge of the hacking activity be carried forward by two GRU units in Moscow. Putin will disclaim involvement.

If Trump does not ask, he will be clearly failing to stand up for US concerns in the face of an unprecedented cyberattack by a unfriendly foreign ability. If he does call for deportation, this signifies acknowledging that Mueller’s investigation into collusion between his expedition and Russia is not a “witch-hunt”. There are real alleged traitors. And, it is about to change, they work for Russian intelligence.

All the signs are that Trump will continue to deny Moscow’s meddling. Rosenstein said on Friday that he told the president a few days ago of the latest indictment. Trump appears to have ignored it. On Thursday, at the Nato summit in Brussels, he flattered Putin again. He even showed Russia’s leader had done good acts in Crimea, after annexing the territory in 2014, including building a connection and a submarine base.

The indictment develops farther intriguing questions as to how the US discovered the identities and precise grades of the 12 GRU detectives, one of them a major. A mole inside the GRU’s ” Aquarium” headquarters in Moscow- inspected in 2013 by Michael Flynn, Trump’s original picking for national protection consultant- cannot be ruled out. But it seems unlikely.

More probable is that US intelligence agencies carried out extensive counter-hacking and intercept measures of their own. And relied on input from America’s European allies including Britain- the same friends that Trump minimized on Thursday during his astonishing attack on Nato countries for what he sees as armed underspending.

According to reports, in the summer of 2014 the Dutch intelligence service hacked into one of the GRU’s undercover cells, controlling out of a university house near Red Square. The Netherlands gained better access to computers being used by the Cozy Bear group. They even sleuthed on the GRU outfit through closed-circuit TV cameras, witnessing their activities in real time.

Seemingly, the US intelligence community- regularly attacked by Trump as a malevolent action- is good at its chore. Michael McFaul, the former US ambassador in Moscow, described himself on Friday as “very impressed” by Mueller’s indictment. It presented” the prodigious capabilities of our intelligence community”, he tweeted, supposing the” Kremlin will take note “.

Putin will not give the GRU detectives to stand trial in America any time soon. But by asking for their extradition, Trump might mitigate the impression that he is beholden to Putin and that his safarus unit may even have colluded with the Kremlin on his track to the White House.

Read more: https :// www.theguardian.com/ us-news/ 2018/ jul/ 13/ carefully-crafted-indictment-of-1 2-russian-spies-heaps-pressure-on-trump

Thanks to Amazon, the government will soon be able to track your face

Putting the business needs of technology whales over our own privacy causes a tomb jeopardy to our democracy

Amazon, the company synonymous with online store, is equipping facial approval technology to government and law enforcement agencies over its entanglement assistances programme. Branded Rekognition, the technology is every bit as dystopian as it sounds.

Given the enormous reach of Amazon’s cloud platform and how readily agencies can unite brand-new applications into their operations, it’s distressing that the company can offer a powerful platform-based surveillance engineering without any public input, omission or regulation. Amazon shall not be required to be have free rein to develop and profit from new surveillance technologies without regard for their effects on civil liberty and human rights. Agreeing to the technological and economic obligations of these companies residence our democracy on perilous footing.

A coalitionof civil liberties and human rights establishments have voiced alarm systems, including the American Civil Liberties Union. They are requesting Amazon to stop rendering its facial acceptance engineering to government and law enforcement agencies. Amazon shareholders and Amazon laborers have joined them, voicing opposition to the company’s involvement in the business of government and police surveillance. Because of its protection and related concerns, impetu is building.

The city of Orlando dropped its pilot program use of Rekognition. Brian Brakeen, CEO of the facial identification busines Kairos, took a stand and said his firm wouldn’t sell the technology to the government.” In the hands of government surveillance those programmes and law enforcement departments ,” Brakeen writes ,” there’s plainly no way that appearance acceptance software will be not used to harm citizens .”

As professors who have studied information technologies and privacy, including the social ramifications of face recognition and biometrics, we share these reservations. We are calling on Amazon to get out of the surveillance business. Our demand is as strong as it is urgent and reasonable.

We don’t want Amazon to simply adjust the functions of its facial acknowledgment engineering or update its policies for proper use. The only responsible course of action commits Amazon doing a ended about-face. It must stop building the facial identification infrastructure for law enforcement agencies and national governments and be committed to never return to the business in the future.

Facial recognition technology poses serious and imminent the risk to political liberty and human rights. As proletarians at Amazon explained in a letter to Jeff Bezos, there is no need to wait and see if the police or government agencies will abuse the technology. It is already clear that ubiquitous, automated facial acceptance is well suited for discriminating against people of color, targeting political activists, and otherwise substantiating militaristic and tyrannical the various modes of government. There is little doubt that its implementation of an infrastructure of networked cameras connected to databases of known faces by artificial intelligence implements will eliminate privacy in public and allow the distinguishing, location, and tracking of individuals, relating their behaviour, actions and the peoples of the territories they meet to their identities.

Amazon is not your average large and strong firm. It obtains a huge amount of personal information about beings, including their buying habits and what the hell is watch and read. The company’s Echo and Alexa products, throw it access to audio recordings of what people say in their homes. It is just a stair away from lending cameras to these devices, and, surely, Amazon already marketplaces a camera for its cloud network. Most people exploiting home shopping inventions would be surprised has found that the technology is likely to be be archiving their faces for be utilized in police databases. Imagine, for example, Apple taking the data collected through its Face ID phone feature and repackaging and reselling it to the Department of Homeland Security or local police.

In fact, given the blurring strand between public policing and private defence, and between authority insurance agencies and their private contractors, we question whether a suspension on government and law enforcement uses of Rekognition would go far enough. The security industry have all along touted the public safety benefits of facial approval engineering. But a functioning facial acknowledgment plan that can systematically and accurately mark specific, targeted individuals compels improving a surveillance infrastructure of unprecedented scope and magnitude, powered by machine learning algorithm and perpetually expanding databases of identity knowledge. The menace that such a massive, automated surveillance apparatus constitutes to society far outweighs the security benefits it could provide. At the very least, it would require an evenly immense organization for oversight, clarity and public input, one that neither Amazon nor any government agency has even begun to develop.

Amazon and the information technology manufacture have lobbied hard to ensure their programmes has been operational and expand in a largely unregulated surrounding. Public policy, the claim proceeds, cannot keeping with innovation. If they believe this assertion, then these companies cannot in good faith contend that their responsibilities are limited to locking such assurances that customers abide by proven the development of policies and constitutions. When authority rehearsals contravene civil liberty, Amazon has a choice to stir. Will it blindly accelerate and exacerbate violations of human rights, or will it take responsibility for its strong technologies?

The authors are affiliated with the following institutions: Peter Asaro, the New School; Kelly Gates, University of California, San Diego; Woodrow Hartzog, Northeastern University; Lilliy Irani, University of California, San Diego; Evan Selinger, Rochester Institute of Technology; and Lucy Suchman, Lancaster University

Chinese government hackers reportedly stole trove of sensitive US naval data

Hackers said to have swiped information, including secret plans for new type of weapon, from US navy contractor

Chinese government intruders have stolen a massive trove of sensitive info from a US navy contractor, including secret plans to develop a new type of submarine-launched anti-ship weapon, according to the Washington Post.

Investigators told the newspaper that infringements were carried out within January and February by a disagreement of the Chinese ministry on the part of states protection, controlling out of the Chinese state of Guangdong.

The contractor, which was not mentioned in the report, works for the Naval Undersea Warfare Center, are stationed in Newport, Rhode Island. It imparts the investigations and developed for submarines and underwater weapons systems.

According to the Post, hackers swiped 614 gigabytes of data that included information relating to sensors, submarine cryptographic systems and a little-known campaign announced Sea Dragon.

The Pentagon has not articulated much about Sea Dragon, put in place in 2012, except that it is aimed at accommodating prevailing military engineerings to brand-new uses.

At the Navy’s request, the Post withheld information about the compromised new missile system, but said it was for a supersonic anti-ship missile that could be launched from submarines.

Commander Bill Speaks, a navy spokesman, declined to confirm the Post report, citing security intellects.

” Evolving cyber menaces are serious matters and we are continuously bolstering our cybersecurity culture by focusing on awareness of the cyber threat, and the suitability of our cyber protections and information technology abilities ,” he told AFP.

Chinese intruders have for years targeted the US armed to plagiarize information and the Pentagon says they have previously swiped crucial data on the brand-new F-3 5 stealth soldier, the advanced Patriot PAC-3 missile system and other very sensitive projects.

News of the hacker starts amid rising frictions between Beijing and Washington on a range of issues including busines and military matters.

The Pentagon last month attracted its summon for China to join maritime exercises in the Pacific because of Beijing’s” sustained militarization” of the South China Sea.

Read more: https :// www.theguardian.com/ world-wide/ 2018/ jun/ 08/ chinese-hackers-us-navy-submarine-missile-secrets-report

China is taking digital control of its people to unprecedented and chilling lengths | John Naughton

The Chinese governments unsettling brand-new method will see citizens rated by good deeds

Watching Donald Trump trying to deal with China is like watching a clown dancing in front of an elephant. The US president’s entire approach is transactional- the method used he employed in his allegedly successful busines as a property developer. It’s all fastens and carrots, bank and counter-bluff, vigorous bluster must be accompanied by rapid retreats.

Sometimes, it appears to work. For illustration, the Chinese manager, Xi Jinping, clearly leant on Kim Jong-un to coerce him to agree to a summit meeting with Trump. But then Xi leant on Trump to rescue the Chinese tech corporation ZTE, brought to its knees by a US ban because it had scaped sanctions on trade with Iran. Trump duly complied and ZTE managers inhaled again.

And so it goes on. But behind these stages a much bigger long-term recreation is being played out. If it were a board game, it would be called Hegemony.( drat: a speedy inquiry reveals that there are already plays on this topic .) Hegemony is an old-fashioned notion, much beloved of Marxists, coined to describe the( military or cultural) predominance of the different countries or group over others. From the mid-1 940 s until 1990, the world was overshadowed by two hegemons- the US and the USSR. After the Soviet Union imploded, the US became the sole global hegemon. But now, with the rise of China, that hegemonic grip seems to be loosening.

The big issue, then, is whether we are witnessing a tectonic switching in geopolitics. My guess is that we are. Trump, who has “members attention” cover of a newt, perhaps can’t see what’s going on, but the Chinese do- and so too do many parts of the US government , notably those concerned with economic increase and national protection, and some of the more reflective each member of Congress.

What these tribes understand is that hegemonic power is largely about industry- and therefore about engineering. And the dominant industries of the future is likely to be dominated by information technology rather than by heavy industries such as sword and autoes. Which is why there is now so much hysterium in the US about reportedly wholesale theft of intellectual property by Chinese agencies and the prodigious progress that the country is clearing in estimating and artificial intelligence.

In the old days, western snobbery led to the smug was of the opinion that the Chinese could not originate, merely replica. One hears this less now, as visitors to China return goggle-eyed at the extent to which its beings have integrated digital technology into daily life. One colleague of quarry recently reverted incensed because he had been expected to pay for everything there with his phone. Since he possesses merely an ancient Nokia handset, he was unable to comply and had been reduced to mendicant status, having to ask his Chinese legions to pay for everything.

If the future is digital, hence, a significant minority of China’s 1.4 billion citizens are already there. More vastly, the country’s technocratic lords have sussed that digital technology is not just good for establishing financial transactions frictionless, but too for implementing sophisticated systems of social control.

In particular, they are adapting the pervasive” reputation rating” plan by which online scaffolds try to get feedback on vendor and customer reliability. The government is beginning to roll out its social recognition organization, which intends to” raise the awareness of integrity and the level of trustworthiness in Chinese culture “. It will focus on four various aspects of action:” honest in government things”,” commercial soundnes”,” societal integrity” and” judicial credibility “.

When firstly conceived in 2007, the intent was to repeat the credit rating organizations common in the west for assessing people’s financial creditworthiness. But why, speculated the Chinese, stop at busines? Why not use the technology to assess how “good” a citizen one is? Everyone starts off with a baseline part of, say, 100 items. You can earn bonus points by doing “good deeds” such as divide and recycling rubbish. On the other side, behaving in what is regarded( by the territory) as disruptive practice can lose you degrees. Examples of deductible action can apparently include: not showing up at a restaurant without nullifying your booking, cheating in online plays, leaving inaccurate produce reviews and even jaywalking. And if your social ascribe score is too low, you find yourself are prohibited from taking flights or roaming on certain trains.

As a way of using digital technology for social restrict, this takes some beat. There were aviator systems in operation. The Chinese plan to have the system fully in place by 2020. By which meter it will be ready for exportation to non-eu countries- who will be queueing up to buy it, because one of the things commonwealths do is to buy the current hegemon’s technology. In 2020, though, Donald Trump will still be ranting on about sword dumping and import tariffs. And passing for two seconds term.

What I’m reading

Four Seasons retreat
Weaponised Bach? Passes out that those rumors that the best way to rid a neighbourhood of lurking bullies is to play thunderous classical music might be true after all. Baroque is best, according to a fascinating essay in the LA Review of Books – with Vivaldi and Mozart being particularly potent. The mystifying wonder is why is it that music that seems very sweet and harmonious to some ears can be so intolerable to others.

Kissinger writes on …
artificial intelligence. Surely some mistake? But no: there’s a really thoughtful patch by him in the Atlantic about our unpreparedness for it.

NYC from above
New York as you’ve never seen it before. Phil Holland specialises in seeing ultra-high-definition aerial videos of metropolitans. His one of New York is stunning.

Read more: https :// www.theguardian.com/ commentisfree/ 2018/ may/ 27/ china-taking-digital-control-of-its-people-to-unprecedented-and-chilling-lengths