Tag Archives: Questions

35 Questions About Kindness, Happiness, and Gratitude to Keep Your Thanksgiving Celebration Fun and Uplifting
November 12, 2018 12:00 pm|Comments (0)

With Thanksgiving around the corner hosts and hostesses are thinking about holiday preparations. Some find it stressful, others feel joyful about it. Either way, it’s easy to lose sight of the spirit of Thanksgiving, including gratitude, kindness, and happiness

Countless studies have proven the psychological and physical benefits of these attributes. Why not serve up some added encouragement to spread a little happiness at the Thanksgiving table?

An especially joyful family event is made up of a mix of good memories and happy reminders, mingled with an appreciation of the present moment. That sounds easy enough, but some families find it difficult to remain in this frame of mind and buttons can be pushed, making the occasion more stressful than celebratory. Use these questions as prompts to keep an uplifting and fun conversation going. Who knows? As an added bonus you may learn some things about your friends and family that surprise you. 

  1. Aside from the obvious (family, health, job, etc.) what are you most grateful for?
  2. What’s one gift or talent you have that makes you most happy and/or grateful?
  3. What’s one memory that still makes you laugh?
  4. What is biggest food failure or the wackiest Holiday/Thanksgiving memory you remember (that you can share)?
  5. If a UFO filled with friendly aliens landed in your backyard what would you do to make them feel welcomed?
  6. Name anyone who makes you smile. why? 
  7. What choices have you made in the last five years that you’d thank yourself for making?
  8. What is the most memorable act of kindness you performed this past year?
  9. What’s the kindest thing someone did for you this past year?
  10. When you do something nice for someone how do you like them to express their gratitude?
  11. What scent makes you happy?
  12. Do you smile at strangers? Why or why not?
  13. What’s something you witnessed recently that reminded you that people are good?
  14. If you had a realistic wand, what would you change to bring more happiness to this world?
  15. If you had any 3 wishes what would they be and how/why would they make you happy?
  16. What one or two simple pleasure makes you feel most content?
  17. What’s something enjoyable you get to experience every day that you’ve come to take for granted?
  18. What’s your happy food?
  19. What celebrity would you love to meet and why would it make you happy?
  20. What’s the best thing that happened so far today?
  21. What’s the last song you heard that you enjoyed? How did it make you feel, and why?
  22. How about a movie? Which one have you most enjoyed lately?
  23. What’s one thing do you most appreciate about your home, and have you taken time to enjoy it recently?
  24. If you could paint the sky any other color what would it be?
  25. If you were moving to another country what’s one thing you would take with you to remind you of the comforts of home?
  26. Which one of your six senses (including intuition) most allows you to experience things that make you happy or grateful?
  27. What one or two things in nature have you appreciated lately?
  28. If someone were to surprise you with something to make you feel happy and grateful, what would it be?
  29. What sight or sound is most likely to make you pause to appreciate?
  30. In what situation(s) do you feel most free to let your silly side show? 
  31. When you’re in a bad mood what cheers you up?
  32. What’s your best secret to cheer up someone else?
  33. What song makes you want to get up and dance?
  34. What was/is your favorite cartoon?
  35. What three things (besides food, air, and water) can you not live without?

Add a few questions of your own to customize this little game to your friend and family history. Print out the full list or put the questions on individual pieces of paper and toss them in a dish to pass. Have fun with it!

Published on: Nov 12, 2018

Tech

Posted in: Cloud Computing|Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Elon Musk Was Right. The Questions Were Bonehead
May 6, 2018 6:00 am|Comments (0)

Tesla stock dropped a bit after Elon Musk dismissed a some analyst questions, calling them “boring” and “bonehead.” The take from the business press was that Musk‘s behavior was “bizarre” (Marketwatch) and “irksome” (Wall Street Journal).

Musk later stated that it was “foolish” of him not to just answer the questions but then explained why the questions were absurd. Which indeed they were. As Musk explained:

“The 2 questioners I ignored on the Q1 call are sell-side analysts who represent a short seller thesis, not investors.”

In other words, these were analysts who had a drum to beat (hardly an unusual circumstance, as I’ll explain below). Musk continued that the first question was boneheaded because

“it had already been answered in the headline of the Q1 newsletter he received beforehand, along with details in the body of the letter.”

In other words, the analyst who asked the first question didn’t bother to read the materials he’d been given (again, not unusual with analysts) or, if he did read them, he wasn’t able to absorb the information because he was filtering it through his preconceptions.

Musk continued to explain that the second question (about Model 3 demand) was absurd because

“Tesla has roughly half a million reservations, despite no advertising & no cars in showrooms [and] even after reaching 5k/week production, it would take 2 years just to satisfy existing demand even if new sales dropped to 0.”

In other words, the analyst who asked the second question either can’t understand, or is willfully deciding to ignore, basic math and simple logic.

Now, I don’t know those analysts personally and, for all I know, they may be frelling brilliant, but in my experience financial analysts are a fairly dim lot.

Look, anyone can be an “analyst.” The title carries exactly as much weight as “consultant.” Maybe less. To be an analyst, all you really need is the ability to look credible, ask obvious questions, and then write a semi-coherent paragraph that fits within the parameters set by whomever is paying your salary.

The only other job requirement is the shamelessness to promote the few times your predictions turn out to be true and quietly bury the many times your predictions turn out to be wrong. And even then, you can hedge your bets by being vague about the time line.

Analysts are never, ever called to account when their predictions go wrong. For example, Lawrence Kudlow has has been predicting rampant inflation for decades. But rather than being laughed off the air, he’s now Trump’s Director of the National Economic Council.

While clueless Kudlow might be an extreme case, there are dozens of similar examples. Just look at what happened to the careers all the analysts who were predicting Y2K disasters. (Hint: they moved on and got promoted.)

As for the analysts who follow Tesla, Elon Musk surely knows that most of them are full of bullsh*t, because the games they play are painfully obvious. No CEO of any intelligence (much less Musk, who is genuinely brilliant) would give a two-cent stamp for the opinion of ANY analyst on earth were it not for the lemming-like behavior of a certain class of easily-bamboozled investors, not to mention a small army of business reporters who depend upon the analysts for juicy quotes.

Seriously, imagine what it must be like to be Elon Musk surrounded by people of average or slightly above average intelligence who continually ask silly questions. It would be like you or me being forced to spend 24 hours answering questions from toddlers. It’s a wonder he doesn’t go crazy.

Anyway, what’s truly “irksome” about this entire situation is that, rather than asking ludirous questions, the analysts could have asked questions that actually meant something, like:

  • “Why are you simultaneously promoting the idea of self-driving cars and the notion that AI constitutes a threat to humanity?”

or

  • “How can you prove 100% that the supply chain for all your component parts have zero child labor or slave labor?

Yes, I realize those aren’t the sort of questions that financial analysts are supposed to ask at an earnings call but that’s the point. If you want to understand the earnings, read the damn report.

Don’t waste Musk’s time–or ours–trying to work your own lame agenda.

Tech

Posted in: Cloud Computing|Tags: , , , , ,
The Questions Zuckerberg Should Have Answered About Russia
April 12, 2018 6:00 am|Comments (0)

Over the last two days, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was questioned for more than 10 hours by two different Congressional committees. There was granular focus on privacy definitions and data collection, and quick footwork by Zuckerberg—backed by a phalanx of lawyers, consultants, and coaches—to craft a narrative that users “control” their data. (They don’t.) But the gaping hole at the center of both hearings was the virtual absence of questions on the tactics and purpose of Russian information operations conducted against Americans on Facebook during the 2016 elections.

Here are the five of the biggest questions about Russia that Zuckerberg wasn’t asked or didn’t answer—and why it’s important for Facebook to provide clear information on these issues.

1. What were the tools and tactics used by Russian entities to execute information operations against American citizens, and what were the narratives pursued?

In both hearings, in answering unrelated questions, Zuckerberg began to describe “large networks of fake accounts” established by Russian entities. In both instances, he was cut off. This was a significant missed opportunity to pull back the curtain on the mechanisms of Russian information operations against the American public.

The vast majority of information made available by Facebook—and the focus of questions in response—have been about ads and promoted content from Russian entities like the Internet Research Agency. In fact, this was not the primary means of distributing content, collecting information, identifying potential supporters, and promoting narratives. The main tool for this was fake accounts posting “native” content—plain old Facebook posts—building relationships with real users.

In Wednesday’s hearing before the House Energy & Commerce Committee, for example, Zuckerberg said that tens of thousands of fake accounts were taken down to prevent interference in elections in 2017, implying that this was mostly relating to Russia. But this wholesale removal of accounts obviously went way beyond the 740 accounts that have been identified as buying ads on behalf of the IRA. Zuckerberg focused only on ads bought by Russian accounts, not the regular Facebook posts that were so much more numerous. He testified that the Russian accounts were primarily using “issues ads”—aimed at influencing people’s views on issues rather than promoting specific candidates or political messaging. Asked about the content though, Zuckerberg said he had no specific knowledge.

In the indictment of the IRA, prosecutors highlighted the fact that the agency had used false IDs to verify false personas. So, while Facebook’s announcement that group pages will now require verification with a government ID and a physical address that can be validated, fake IDs and the use of US-registered shell corporations (a point raised by Senator Sheldon Whitehouse) can be used to bypass these security protocols—albeit with a much more significant expenditure of resources.

Zuckerberg said Facebook only identified Russian information operations being conducted on their platform right before the 2016 elections. But in his written testimony, he says they saw and addressed activity relating to Russian intelligence agencies earlier. And from 2014 onward, Facebook was made aware of the aggressive information campaigns being run against Ukraine by Russia.

It wasn’t an accident that Zuckerberg used the term “sophisticated adversaries” in his prepared statement. Facebook, more than anyone, has visibility into what Russia does and why it works. Apparently, no one was interested in hearing what he had to say.

2. What personal data does Facebook make available to the Russian state media monitoring agency Roskomnadzor or other Russian agencies? Is this only from accounts located in or operated from Russia, or does this include Facebook’s global data?

These questions were asked by former fighter pilot and Russia-hawk Rep. Adam Kinzinger—and answered evasively by Zuckerberg, who did not address the fact that the Russian government requires companies like Facebook to store their data in Russia precisely so they can access it (and that the Russians say that Facebook has agreed to comply). Very few companies—including Twitter and YouTube—have provided much transparency on what data they share with the Russian government. This is important because, depending on the scale, Russia doesn’t need to rely on data harvesters if they can just get it themselves. In another instance, a corporate partnership was formed with Uber to force data sharing.

This is also important because Zuckerberg expressed extreme skepticism about sharing data with the US government. Does he feel the same way about foreign entities? When law enforcement or intelligence agencies from more aggressive foreign governments ask for information, does Facebook comply? Is there any instance where they have complied with a foreign government request that they would deny the United States?

In both hearings, Zuckerberg was also asked if Russia or China scrape Facebook data, or used apps like the one used by Aleksandr Kogan, the data scientist who provided Facebook data to Cambridge Analytica. Zuckerberg responded that he didn’t have specific knowledge of that—but, as Rep. Jan Schakowsky pointed out, there were 9 million apps scraping data, so how can they possibly begin to know where the data and all its derivative copies went?

Zuckerberg called Chinese internet companies a “strategic and technological threat”—and whoever asked the question just moved on. This is a huge admission from one of the people best positioned to understand how AI and data tech can be weaponized by adversaries. Next time, maybe let the man talk about what he sees and the threats we are up against?

3. Did Facebook delete data related to Russian information operations conducted against American citizens? Will it agree to make this material available for researchers?

In the House hearing, there was one question relating to data preservation in connection to the Cambridge Analytica case. But not a single member asked if Facebook has preserved all of the data and content connected to Russian information operations conducted against American citizens, or whether that data and content would be made available to researchers or intelligence agencies for evaluation.

Many accounts have been pulled down and deleted, and while some of the advertising clients have been exposed, many of the fake accounts and false identities are not known to the public. It is vital that this information be analyzed by people who understand what the Russians were trying to achieve so we can evaluate how to limit computational propaganda from hostile entities and assess the impact these operations had on our population. Without this kind of analysis, we will never unravel the damage or build realistic defenses against these capabilities.

Zuckerberg got no questions about mitigating the psychological impact of these operations. There were no questions to about Facebook’s own internal research and evaluation of these tools and tactics. And no one asked what Facebook knows about their broader effectiveness or impact on the public.

4. What assistance do Facebook employees embedded with advertising clients provide? Did any Facebook employees provide support to the Internet Research Agency or any other business or agency in Russia targeting content to American citizens?

Facebook dodged a major bullet because this entire line of questioning was left unexplored. There was one question about Facebook employees embedded in 2016 political campaigns; largely Zuckerberg answered sideways. But there are extremely important questions to be raised about the way in which Facebook employees aided and enabled harvesters of data and the targeting of hostile information operations—not only against the American public, but in other countries as well.

If Facebook employees worked with the Russians to define more effective audience targeting, for example, then they had vastly more knowledge than they admit and are vastly more complicit. The same would be true if Facebook embeds were working with third parties like Cambridge Analytica and other companies that help governments and ruling parties target their oppositions and win elections. For example, Cambridge Analytica/SCL’s work in Africa shows how aggressively Facebook was used in elections. Did Facebook know? Were they involved? Do their employees have direct knowledge of or aid “black PR” and coercive psychological operations?

5. Does Facebook have copies of data uploaded to “custom audiences” by any Russian entity?

In many ways, the data will be the fingerprints of the investigations of the Russian operations in the 2016 elections. As part of Facebook’s “custom audiences” feature, you can upload datasets to target Facebook users. If there is overlapping targeting data or instances in which similar data was used by different advertising clients, you can show potential coordination between separate entities—for example, maybe the IRA and the NRA, or the dark money PACs running ads against Clinton. Does Facebook have any known Russian datasets from 2016 that could be compared to Cambridge Analytica and or Trump campaign data?

Senator Amy Klobuchar highlighted the fact that 126 million people saw IRA content and asked if these people overlapped with the 87 million who had their data scraped by Cambridge. Zuckerberg said it was “entirely possible” that they overlapped. If this can be documented, it would make it likely that the Cambridge Analytica data was used by the Russians and by the Trump campaign—and this would mean coordination between the two entities. The question then would be who knew about the shared data?

American privacy is important. But gaining a more expansive understanding of the information operations being targeted against our population by hostile foreign actors like Russia is also critical. In that respect, the Zuckerberg hearings were a huge missed opportunity. We do not have a lot of time to assess and evaluate what happened in 2016 before the 2018 elections are upon us. This is not merely a cybersecurity challenge; it’s not just about protecting voting machines or email servers. There is an information component that is not being addressed, and doing so gets harder when companies like Facebook are erasing and suppressing the data that can help us become more informed and help us develop a new kind of human-led deterrence that will prevent these campaigns from being as effective in the future.

Zuckerberg repeatedly referred to the idea of data “control” that was completely nonsensical to anybody who actually speaks English as a first language. We don’t control our data. Especially not when Facebook is aggressively harvesting data on everyone, not just their 2 billion users, and building internet access globally so they can get even more data. It doesn’t matter that Facebook isn’t “selling data”—an oft-repeated theme. They are using psychographics to profile you and selling advertisers access to the products of those algorithms. This is why there was evasion on questions about predictive profiling—the entire backend of adtech. Facebook knows it works. They use it every day—and they understand exactly how effective it can be for hostile actors like Russia.


Mr. Zuck Goes to Washington


Molly K. McKew (@MollyMcKew) is an expert on information warfare and the narrative architect at New Media Frontier. She advised Georgian President from 2009-2013 and former Moldovan Prime Minister Vlad Filat in 2014-15.

Tech

Posted in: Cloud Computing|Tags: , , , , ,
10 Questions to Ask IDaaS Vendors Before You Buy
January 26, 2017 3:06 pm|Comments (0)

Identity as a service (IDaaS), also known as identity and access management as a service, uses a cloud infrastructure for securely managing user identities and access enforcement. At its most basic level, IDaaS enables single sign-on (SSO) for systems in the cloud or on-premises, but it goes well beyond that to include access provisioning and deprovisioning, governance and analytics.

To read this article in full or to leave a comment, please click here

(Insider Story)
Computerworld Cloud Computing


All articles

Posted in: Web Hosting News|Tags: , , ,
Moving to the Cloud? 10 Key Questions for CIOs
October 7, 2016 5:25 am|Comments (0)

According to Cloud Tech, CIOs are on the front lines: In 72 percent of companies surveyed, chief information officers lead the cloud computing charge.


RSS-4

Posted in: Web Hosting News|Tags: , , ,
FedRAMP TIC overlay pilots to answer questions around agency, cloud provider responsibilities
October 8, 2015 3:20 am|Comments (0)

The FedRAMP program office, which aims to accelerate the authorization of cloud computing technologies at federal agencies, has been working with …


RSS-1

Posted in: Web Hosting News|Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
IDG Contributor Network: Is your DNS set up for success? Ask yourself these 4 questions
August 28, 2015 9:05 pm|Comments (0)

Have you ever really thought about the importance of DNS to your business?

DNS, the Domain Name System, is sometimes called the “phonebook of the Internet.” Just as the phonebook allows you to look up names, addresses, and phone numbers of people and businesses to be categorized and referenced, DNS allows for domain names and their corresponding IP addresses to be organized and easily accessed. For example, a quick DNS query shows that the IPv4 address for networkworld.com is 70.42.185.102 (and there is apparently no IPv6 address!).

But DNS stores much more than just IP addresses. Email protocols rely on DNS extensively to store information about message routing (MX records), policy (SPF records) and digital signatures (DKIM). DNS also houses cryptographic keys for not only its own security uses, but also for email and now even websites (TLSA records). The extensibility, versatility, and ubiquity of DNS makes it an ideal choice for storing all kinds of information. Because so much depends on DNS, it is a critically important service; every time you use the Internet, you’re relying on DNS.  

To read this article in full or to leave a comment, please click here


RSS-1

Posted in: Web Hosting News|Tags: , , , , ,