company:salesforce

  • The #saas 10-Year Challenge
    https://hackernoon.com/the-saas-10-year-challenge-ca21265f9061?source=rss----3a8144eabfe3---4

    If you are on the internet, you’ve probably heard of this latest fad, The 10-Year Challenge, or the 2009 vs. 2019 Challenge. It’s simple, you post an old photo from 2009 next to a recent photo taken in 2019 and give it a nice caption. Somewhat like this ?Same old Salesforce, just 10x bigger and better ?While people are going nuts posting their 10-year challenges, data scientists are happy that they found a golden data set to train their facial recognition algorithms. Jokes apart, on a serious note I started wondering what if SaaS took the 10-Year-Challenge.. Presenting to you “The SaaS 10-Year Challenge”Let’s look at some interesting trends and understand how far we came across as an industry!From “selling software” to “serving customers”Back in the day if you were a SaaS company, you were (...)

    #venture-capital #saas-ten-year-challenge #b2b #martech

  • Interview with Chief Scientist at #salesforce: Dr. Richard Socher
    https://hackernoon.com/interview-with-chief-scientist-at-salesforce-dr-richard-socher-c982b9edc

    Interview with the Chief Scientist at Salesforce: Dr. Richard SocherPart 16 of The series where I interview my heroes.Index to “Interviews with ML Heroes”Today, I’m honored to be talking to the Chief Scientist at Salesforce, one of the best Deep-NLP Teachers: Dr. Richard Socher.Richard is Chief Scientist at Salesforce and has completed his Ph.D. in the Machine Learning domain from Stanford. He has also taught one of the best course and now a MOOC on NLP: CS224nAbout the Series:I have very recently started making some progress with my Self-Taught Machine Learning Journey. But to be honest, it wouldn’t be possible at all without the amazing community online and the great people that have helped me.In this Series of Blog Posts, I talk with People that have really inspired me and whom I look up to (...)

    #salesforce-data-science #artificial-intelligence #deep-learning #machine-learning

  • What is Salesforce? Four days, 170,000 people, and one Metallica concert later, I figured out what Salesforce is — Quartz
    https://qz.com/1500717/what-is-salesforce-four-days-170000-people-and-one-metallica-concert-later-i-fig

    I had not registered for this session, and had to convince the conference bouncers that my press pass allowed me entry. They allowed me to attend on the condition that I wouldn’t take up a precious chair.

    What dawned on me over the course of this discussion was the sheer ubiquity of software.
    I agreed and sat in a chair at the far end of the room. Slowly, several people, all of them white, nearly all of them women, joined our table. One worked for a community bank in Wisconsin. Another for Freddie Mac. Two of the women, it turned out, worked for the company my brother co-founded, which often helps financial firms with Salesforce.

    This was the closest I had come to understanding what Salesforce is actually good for, beyond throwing swanky parties. Everyone at the table had used Salesforce to solve problems at their companies. It had worked well. They had many more problems, and wanted to figure out the best way to use the platform to solve those, too. As they discussed how best to “leverage Financial Services Cloud,” their heads nodded.

    What dawned on me over the course of this discussion was the sheer ubiquity of software. Yes, it is several years now since Marc Andreessen wrote that “software is eating the world.” But it’s not just the smartphones and websites that we have come to be familiar with as “software.” It’s literally everything. Do anything in a modern city and it will trigger a long string of computational processes. Test-drive a car, express interest in an insurance plan, apply for a loan, contribute to a nonprofit, use a credit card, call airline customer service, change a t-shirt order from “large” to “medium,” and you will be entered into a database, added to annual reports, sent automated emails, plugged into “people who buy X also buy Y” algorithms. This is obviously true for hip startups like AirBnb. It is also true for boring, ancient, bailed-out behemoths like Freddie Mac.

    Usually, the software that runs in the dark server rooms of non-tech companies either comes with hefty license fees or is barely functional, hacked together over years by in-house coders who have come and gone. Information relevant to the company may be spread across hundreds of spreadsheets and thousands of emails, accessible only from certain computers or networks. One of the chief complaints of the woman from Freddie Mac was that the company has “a lot of legacy systems” that need to be modernized.

    “Enterprise software”—specifically “customer relationship management” software—aims to solve, or at least alleviate, such problems. Benioff’s insight was to do so using the “cloud.” Instead of charging people for a license to use your software, a la Windows XP, have them pay for a subscription to use your service, which can be accessed anywhere. It’s like Gmail, but for all of the mind-numbing tasks of the modern salesperson, customer service representative, or middle manager, like inputting what happened on a call with a customer or generating inventory reports. No more understaffed IT departments, no more inaccessible spreadsheets, no more massive upfront costs.

    These days, most people use several cloud-based services, like Spotify or Dropbox. It’s why the Google Chromebook can be a thing, and why Jack Dorsey, Twitter’s CEO, can get by without ever using a computer. It’s why Salesforce can count among its several mascots SaaSy, named after “Software as a Service,” a dancing white circle with arms and legs, but no face, that displays the word “software” in a red circle with a red line crossing it out. Nothing to install, just the cloud. That is sassy.

    But Benioff was onto the idea early. Less than 20 years have passed since he staged a sassy fake protest at the annual conference of the incumbent CRM giant, Siebel Systems, with protesters chanting, “The internet is really neat, software is obsolete!” Now 89 of the companies on the Fortune 100 use Salesforce. For the past three years, Salesforce has grown over 20% year-over-year every single quarter.

    What is Salesforce? Four days, 170,000 people, and one Metallica concert later, I figured out what Salesforce is — Quartz
    https://qz.com/1500717/what-is-salesforce-four-days-170000-people-and-one-metallica-concert-later-i-fig

    Giving more people access to high-paying tech jobs. Looks great.

    Soon after that, though, a darker, less altruistic interpretation of “inclusive capitalism” began to emerge. One that sees it not primarily as a way to bring in the excluded, but to boost the Salesforce brand, to fortify the cult, to attract talent and investors. To establish a place in history.

    After the PepUp Tech video, another told the story of billionaire Italian fashion designer Brunello Cucinelli, who uses Salesforce at his company. Cucinelli was himself in attendance. After the video finished, he took the microphone and spoke directly to Benioff in rapid-fire Italian, through an interpreter, as if he were the effusive prognosticator of an ancient king.

    “For your birthday,” Cucinelli pronounced, “I have a special request to submit to you.” This was how I learned that the keynote speech was happening on the day of Benioff’s 54th birthday.

    If “inclusive capitalism” has any chance of succeeding, one could hope for no better agent than Benioff.
    “I would like you, in this special world, which is the cradle of genius, you should envision something that lasts for the next 2,000 years,” Cucinelli continued. “In ancient Greece, Pericles 2,500 years ago stated, ‘as long as our Parthenon is standing, our Athens will be standing, too.’ In ancient Rome, Hadrian stated, ‘I feel responsible for the beauty in the world,’ and he states, ‘my Rome will be there forever.’ In my Florence, during the Renaissance, there is Lorenzo the Magnificent, another genius, who basically sits around the same table, Michelangelo, Leonardo, all together, and they design and plan for eternity…I think you, Marc, you could be the new Lorenzo the Magnificent of this side of the world.”

    Benioff was certainly positive about the first video, but this speech appeared to affect him in a deeper way. Salesforce Tower is now the tallest building in San Francisco. There is a children’s hospital in the city with his name on it. Maybe not quite 2,000 years, but those will last. And with Time under his belt, Benioff is in a position to become known as the guy who figured out how to improve the world while making loads of cash. He has deflected suggestions that he intends to run for political office by saying he can do even more good as a CEO.

    If “inclusive capitalism” has any chance of succeeding, one could hope for no better agent than Benioff. He’s a large, imposing, wealthy white man with ties to cultural icons and A-level politicians, but also to community leaders and local activists. Instead of making grand, world-changing gestures to “cure all diseases,” his focus is local, on things he has a personal stake in and can observe, like the well-being of the Bay Area. He has a chief philanthropy officer. Salesforce develops tools that make charitable giving easier for companies and organizations. His intentions appear to be good.

    But it’s also true that Benioff probably couldn’t have bought Time magazine, or built such a tall tower, if not for the exclusive capitalism that he hopes to rid the world of. This is the hard thing about being a billionaire who wants to do good: they only feel responsible for the beauty in the world so long as they still get to have lots and lots and lots of money. Benioff can donate tens of millions of dollars, marginally expanding the set of people who benefit from the status quo, without really losing any of his own wealth. And if anything, it raises his status even further.

    But if “inclusive” and “capitalism” turn out to be incompatible, would he be willing to give it all up for the greater good?

    #USA #capitalisme #action_charitable #affaires

  • What is Salesforce? Four days, 170,000 people, and one Metallica concert later, I figured out what Salesforce is, by Nikhil Sonnad — Quartz
    https://qz.com/1500717/what-is-salesforce-four-days-170000-people-and-one-metallica-concert-later-i-fig

    The push for “inclusive capitalism” implies that the system, as it is, is exclusive. By saying he can do more as a CEO than in government, Benioff is making the absurd claim that those best suited to fix this situation are the very people who have benefited most from it—he and his ultra-wealthy peers. They are responsible for the beauty in the world, and we should be thankful for any inclusion they deign to hand out to the rest of us.

    #reportage #hilarant sur la grand-messe de #salesforce

  • Text Summarization Using #keras Models
    https://hackernoon.com/text-summarization-using-keras-models-366b002408d9?source=rss----3a8144e

    Learn how to summarize text in this article by Rajdeep Dua who currently leads the developer relations team at Salesforce India, and Manpreet Singh Ghotra who is currently working at Salesforce developing a machine learning platform/APIs.Text summarization is a method in natural language processing (NLP) for generating a short and precise summary of a reference document. Producing a summary of a large document manually is a very difficult task. Summarization of a text using machine learning techniques is still an active research topic. Before proceeding to discuss text summarization and how we do it, here is a definition of summary.A summary is a text output that is generated from one or more texts that conveys relevant information from the original text in a shorter form. The goal of (...)

    #artificial-intelligence #machine-learning #keras-models #deep-learning

  • Lyft Is Not Your Friend
    http://jacobinmag.com/2018/10/the-myth-of-the-woke-brand-uber-lyft-capitalism

    10.25.2018 BY MEAGAN DAY #UNITED_STATES #CAPITAL #CONJECTURES #LIBERALISM

    Lyft is the latest brand trying to build market share by posing as a “progressive” corporation. But the fight can’t be good corporations against bad ones — it’s working people against capitalism.
    In early 2017, liberals hit on a new strategy to resist the nascent Trump administration: #DeleteUber.

    It started when New York City’s taxi drivers refused to service JFK airport to protest Trump’s travel ban targeting Muslim-majority countries, and Uber was spotted leveraging the ensuing crisis for profit. Then Uber CEO Travis Kalanick came under fire for accepting an appointment to Trump’s economic advisory council. He announced his resignation from the council, but only weeks later a video leaked of Kalanick reprimanding a driver for his company.

    Amid various ensuing scandals, Kalanick stepped down as CEO of Uber, but by then millions of consumers had turned on the brand in protest, deleting the Uber app from their phone and opting instead for the rideshare giant’s rival Lyft.

    Lyft leaned in, eagerly branding itself as the progressive alternative to Uber by pledging a $1 million donation to the ACLU and trotting out celebrities to promote it as a company committed to “doing things for the right reasons.” Lyft, of course, operates on the same labor model as Uber — its drivers are not employees but independent contractors, and are therefore denied all the benefits and protections that workers receive under more ideal circumstances. Nevertheless, a new refrain rang out across liberaldom: “I don’t use Uber, I use Lyft.”

    What socialists understand that liberals don’t is that brands are corporate enterprises, and corporate enterprises are fundamentally motivated by the pursuit of profit — even in their ostentatious acts of charity and wokeness.

    Three surefire ways to maximize profit are: suppressing labor costs by paying workers as little as you can get away with, lobbying the state for deregulation and lower taxes, and opening new markets by finding new things to commodify and sell. Businesses will always pursue these avenues of profit maximization where they can. It’s not a matter of ethics but of market discipline: if they don’t, they run the risk of losing out to the competition and eventually capsizing.

    Sometimes corporations do things for publicity that make it seem like their interests are not fundamentally misaligned with those of the working-class majority, who rely on decent wages and well-funded public services. But those efforts are meant to sustain public confidence in a given corporation’s brand, which is occasionally necessary for keeping up profits, as Uber’s losses in 2017 demonstrate. When corporate profits come into direct conflict with active measures to improve people’s wellbeing, corporations will always select the former. Case in point: Lyft just donated $100k to the campaign against a ballot measure that would create a tax fund to house the homeless in San Francisco, where the company is based.

    Why did the progressive alternative to Uber do this? Well, because the company doesn’t want to pay higher taxes. Because high taxes imperil profits, and profits are the point. Another likely rationale is to build stronger bonds with pro-business advocacy groups in San Francisco, so that the company will have allies if the city decides to implement regulations against ride-sharing services, which is rumored to be a possibility.

    Lyft has already mastered the art of suppressing labor costs and opening new markets. Next on the wish list, low taxes and deregulation. It’s pretty formulaic when you get down to it.

    San Francisco is home to an estimated 7,500 homeless people. Proposition C would tap the large corporations that benefit from the city’s public infrastructure to double the city’s homelessness budget in an attempt to resolve the crisis. The corporations opposing Proposition C say that the move would imperil jobs. This is not an analysis, it’s a threat. What they’re saying is that if the city reaches too far into their pockets, they’ll take their business elsewhere, draining the region of jobs and revenue as punishment for government overreach. It’s a mobster’s insinuation: Nice economy, shame if something happened to it. Meanwhile thousands of people sleep in the streets, even though the money to shelter them is within the city’s borders.

    Of course, in every struggle over taxes and industry regulation there may be a few canny corporate outliers looking to ingratiate their brand to the public by bucking the trend. In the case of Proposition C, it’s Salesforce, whose CEO Marc Benioff has made a public display of support for the ballot measure. But before you rush to praise Benioff, consider that only two months ago he lauded Trump’s tax cuts for fueling “aggressive spending” and injecting life into the economy.

    You could spend your life as an engaged consumer hopping from brand to brand, as liberals often do, pledging allegiance to this one and protesting that one to the beat of the new cycle drum. You could delete Lyft from your phone the same way you did with Uber, and find another rideshare app that you deem more ethical, until that one inevitably disappoints you too.

    Or you could press pause, stop scrambling for some superior consumption choice to ease your conscience, and entertain the socialist notion that deep down all corporations are objectively the same. They all exist to maximize return on investment for the people who own them. They are all in competition with each other to plunder our commons most effectively, with the lowest overhead, which means compensating the least for employees’ work. And when the rubber meets the road, they will all prioritize private profits over the wellbeing of those who own no productive assets, which is the vast majority of the people on the planet. They will demonstrate these priorities on a case-by-case basis, and on a massive global scale so long as capitalism prevails.

    “We’re woke,” said Lyft CEO John Zimmerman at the height of the Uber scandal. It was horseshit — it always is. And until liberals stop believing than any brand can be truly “woke,” or can offer a genuine alternative to the predatory behavior they observe in other “unwoke” brands, they’ll be unable to mount a meaningful resistance to anything.

    Whether we want to ensure clean drinking water for the residents of Flint or to shelter the homeless of San Francisco, we have to draw clear battle lines that are up to the challenge. The fight can’t be good corporations against bad corporations. It has to be working people against capitalism.

    #USA #transport #disruption #Lyft

  • Lyft Is Not Your Friend
    http://jacobinmag.com/2018/10/the-myth-of-the-woke-brand-uber-lyft-capitalism

    BY MEAGAN DAY
    Lyft is the latest brand trying to build market share by posing as a “progressive” corporation. But the fight can’t be good corporations against bad ones — it’s working people against capitalism.

    In early 2017, liberals hit on a new strategy to resist the nascent Trump administration: #DeleteUber.

    It started when New York City’s taxi drivers refused to service JFK airport to protest Trump’s travel ban targeting Muslim-majority countries, and Uber was spotted leveraging the ensuing crisis for profit. Then Uber CEO Travis Kalanick came under fire for accepting an appointment to Trump’s economic advisory council. He announced his resignation from the council, but only weeks later a video leaked of Kalanick reprimanding a driver for his company.

    Amid various ensuing scandals, Kalanick stepped down as CEO of Uber, but by then millions of consumers had turned on the brand in protest, deleting the Uber app from their phone and opting instead for the rideshare giant’s rival Lyft.

    Lyft leaned in, eagerly branding itself as the progressive alternative to Uber by pledging a $1 million donation to the ACLU and trotting out celebrities to promote it as a company committed to “doing things for the right reasons.” Lyft, of course, operates on the same labor model as Uber — its drivers are not employees but independent contractors, and are therefore denied all the benefits and protections that workers receive under more ideal circumstances. Nevertheless, a new refrain rang out across liberaldom: “I don’t use Uber, I use Lyft.”

    What socialists understand that liberals don’t is that brands are corporate enterprises, and corporate enterprises are fundamentally motivated by the pursuit of profit — even in their ostentatious acts of charity and wokeness.

    Three surefire ways to maximize profit are: suppressing labor costs by paying workers as little as you can get away with, lobbying the state for deregulation and lower taxes, and opening new markets by finding new things to commodify and sell. Businesses will always pursue these avenues of profit maximization where they can. It’s not a matter of ethics but of market discipline: if they don’t, they run the risk of losing out to the competition and eventually capsizing.

    Sometimes corporations do things for publicity that make it seem like their interests are not fundamentally misaligned with those of the working-class majority, who rely on decent wages and well-funded public services. But those efforts are meant to sustain public confidence in a given corporation’s brand, which is occasionally necessary for keeping up profits, as Uber’s losses in 2017 demonstrate. When corporate profits come into direct conflict with active measures to improve people’s wellbeing, corporations will always select the former. Case in point: Lyft just donated $100k to the campaign against a ballot measure that would create a tax fund to house the homeless in San Francisco, where the company is based.

    Why did the progressive alternative to Uber do this? Well, because the company doesn’t want to pay higher taxes. Because high taxes imperil profits, and profits are the point. Another likely rationale is to build stronger bonds with pro-business advocacy groups in San Francisco, so that the company will have allies if the city decides to implement regulations against ride-sharing services, which is rumored to be a possibility.

    Lyft has already mastered the art of suppressing labor costs and opening new markets. Next on the wish list, low taxes and deregulation. It’s pretty formulaic when you get down to it.

    San Francisco is home to an estimated 7,500 homeless people. Proposition C would tap the large corporations that benefit from the city’s public infrastructure to double the city’s homelessness budget in an attempt to resolve the crisis. The corporations opposing Proposition C say that the move would imperil jobs. This is not an analysis, it’s a threat. What they’re saying is that if the city reaches too far into their pockets, they’ll take their business elsewhere, draining the region of jobs and revenue as punishment for government overreach. It’s a mobster’s insinuation: Nice economy, shame if something happened to it. Meanwhile thousands of people sleep in the streets, even though the money to shelter them is within the city’s borders.

    Of course, in every struggle over taxes and industry regulation there may be a few canny corporate outliers looking to ingratiate their brand to the public by bucking the trend. In the case of Proposition C, it’s Salesforce, whose CEO Marc Benioff has made a public display of support for the ballot measure. But before you rush to praise Benioff, consider that only two months ago he lauded Trump’s tax cuts for fueling “aggressive spending” and injecting life into the economy.

    You could spend your life as an engaged consumer hopping from brand to brand, as liberals often do, pledging allegiance to this one and protesting that one to the beat of the new cycle drum. You could delete Lyft from your phone the same way you did with Uber, and find another rideshare app that you deem more ethical, until that one inevitably disappoints you too.

    Or you could press pause, stop scrambling for some superior consumption choice to ease your conscience, and entertain the socialist notion that deep down all corporations are objectively the same. They all exist to maximize return on investment for the people who own them. They are all in competition with each other to plunder our commons most effectively, with the lowest overhead, which means compensating the least for employees’ work. And when the rubber meets the road, they will all prioritize private profits over the wellbeing of those who own no productive assets, which is the vast majority of the people on the planet. They will demonstrate these priorities on a case-by-case basis, and on a massive global scale so long as capitalism prevails.

    “We’re woke,” said Lyft CEO John Zimmerman at the height of the Uber scandal. It was horseshit — it always is. And until liberals stop believing than any brand can be truly “woke,” or can offer a genuine alternative to the predatory behavior they observe in other “unwoke” brands, they’ll be unable to mount a meaningful resistance to anything.

    Whether we want to ensure clean drinking water for the residents of Flint or to shelter the homeless of San Francisco, we have to draw clear battle lines that are up to the challenge. The fight can’t be good corporations against bad corporations. It has to be working people against capitalism.

    #USA #Lyft #Uber #Arbeit

  • Melinda Gates’ New Research Reveals Alarming Diversity Numbers | WIRED
    https://www.wired.com/story/melinda-gates-mckinsey-diversity-research-alarming

    Point de vue de milliardaire : Nous sommes en mal d’ engineers (à l’américaine) pour nos boîtes et mes copines n’arrivent toujours qu’avec les armes d’une femme traditionnelle à contrôler les affaires de leurs maris. En plus nous rendons les system instable qui nous nourrit si nous acceptons que les différences de race freinent la promotion des êtres les plus doués.

    C’est très bien si MG met à disposition une petite partie de ses milliards pou aider les femmes défavorisées. C’est déjà moins bien quand c’est fait dans la perspective de pouvoir encore mieux nous contrôler et exploiter. Elle est peut-être en train de préparer le chemin pour la première femme présidente des États Unis qui ne sera toujours que la représentante d’une association de malfaiteurs et de ses bandes armées.

    Alors que faire pour récupérer sa fondation afin de former les révolutionnaires dont nous, les petits gens avons besoin ? Il ne faut pas se contenter d’une part de gateau. Il faut mettre la main sur la pâtisserie entière ;-)

    The report arrives two years after Melinda Gates announced plans to build up a personal office, Pivotal Ventures, to dedicate resources and attention to supporting women in tech.

    EXECUTIVES AT TECH companies say gender diversity matters. They opine that there aren’t enough women in tech, and express outrage and frustration that just 11 percent of senior tech leaders are women. But in reality they spend very little of their philanthropic dollars attempting to close this gender and race gap, according to new research released today by Melinda Gates in partnership with McKinsey & Company.

    Last year, according to the report, only 5 percent of companies’ philanthropic giving went to programs that focused explicitly on women and girls in tech. And less than 0.1 percent of their grants went to programming for women of color—a group whose representation in tech is getting worse. Over the past decade, the ratio of black, Latina, and Native American women receiving computing degrees has dropped by a third, from 6 percent to just four percent.

    The companies investigated found that last figure so alarming that twelve of the 32 participants are taking immediate action. They’re uniting to form the Reboot Recognition Tech Coalition, a joint effort by companies like Microsoft, Qualcomm, and LinkedIn to close the gender gap for women of color in tech. They aim to double the number of underrepresented women of color graduating with computer science degrees by 2025, and they’re collectively pledging $12 million toward this goal over three years. This group will coordinate to direct their giving collectively, with the twin goals of creating a set of guidelines that will revamp the computer science major to appeal more to women of color and while building dedicated communities that will support these women within the industry, among other things.

    Gates has long contended that collecting data is critical to addressing the social challenges she has spent the second part of her career tackling as a philanthropist; companies may say they care deeply about problems, but until the research exists to show them exactly what the problem looks like, how it’s changing, and what measures have been shown to be effective in addressing it, not much changes. It’s the same insight Tracy Chou had when, as a programmer at Pinterest in 2013, she published a Medium post asking her peers to contribute the number and percentage of female engineers they employed.

    The report arrives two years after Gates announced plans to build up a personal office, Pivotal Ventures, to dedicate resources and attention to supporting women in tech—in addition to the work she does with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. When we spoke about it then, she voiced the need for more research. “I can’t go convince governments to work on female issues unless I have data,” she said, adding, “Transparency is one of the first things that makes change.”

    Entitled “Reboot Representation: Using CSR and Philanthropy to Close the Gender Gap in Tech,” the report reviews how 32 large tech companies, including Google, eBay and Salesforce have worked internally to support women and close the gender gap. Taken together, these companies brought in $500 billion in sales last year, and they spent more than $500 million on philanthropy. Of that, $24 million went to support programming for women and girls and just $335,000 targeted at programs aimed at women of color.

    In addition to surveying companies about their existing strategies, researchers spoke with more than 100 leaders in the field to determine what strategies were proving effective. The resulting research forms a playbook for companies interested in promoting and supporting gender diversity more effectively. It includes tips for what makes programs successful, advice on how to pick and set a strategy that is in line with a company’s business objectives, and a self-assessment to help companies figure out whether their efforts are working.

    Researchers discovered that companies often didn’t spend their money in data-driven research-underlined ways: Two-thirds of the the companies surveyed concentrated their funding on programs for kids between kindergarten and 12th grade, while research suggests that programs targeting college-age women to bolster their enthusiasm for the field before they choose majors and commit to a career, were more effective. “Few invest philanthropically earlier in higher education to build the cohort they will ultimately recruit from,” write the reports’ authors.

    What’s more, companies rarely coordinate these philanthropic efforts. Within an institution, there are often multiple people working on gender and racial parity, within in human resources, diversity and inclusion teams, or as part of a corporate social responsibility strategy. Yet there’s rarely one person overseeing it all.

    The most important things companies can do, according to Gates, is coordinate these efforts. That’s why she’s excited about the potential of the coalition. As she blogged today, “By working together, they will be able to reach more young women.” The answer to the everyone-in-hoodies problem is not a silver bullet, but a concentrated, industry-wide effort to solve problems the way computer scientists solve problems: methodically, by collecting data, understanding the issues, and testing strategies until the problem is solved.

    #féminisme_de_droite #nantis #ONG

  • Introducing the First Natural Language to #sql #api
    https://hackernoon.com/introducing-the-first-natural-language-to-sql-api-8429229301ce?source=rs

    Talk to your data!You can view the API documentation here: http://docs.dhignite.com/What if, instead of running complex SQL scripts, you could simply ask your database a question? What were my sales yesterday? What were my top selling products in June?This natural search capability has become more common over the past year as companies such as ThoughtSpot, Salesforce, and Tableau all develop similar technologies. This trend of “data democratization” is forcing us to leverage existing technology in new ways.The idea that data should be accessible to the average end user, not confined to data analysts or forced to go through a complex queuing system where time and convenience often rule the day, is our new expectation.Data should be accessible beyond the dashboards and beyond analysts. That (...)

    #machine-learning #nlp #sql-api

  • L’humiliation de Mark Zuckerberg, convoqué devant le Congrès

    http://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2018/04/10/l-humiliation-de-mark-zuckerberg-convoque-devant-le-congres_5283156_3232.htm

    L’heure des comptes a sonné pour le PDG de Facebook, attendu mardi 10 avril au Sénat et le lendemain à la Chambre des représentants, analyse la correspondante du « Monde » à San Francisco Corine Lesnes.

    La série culte Silicon Valley, qui a repris fin mars sur HBO, n’a pas manqué de se moquer. Au générique, elle montre maintenant le logo de Facebook… en cyrillique. Même malin plaisir du côté du rival Snapchat. Pour le 1er avril, l’application préférée des ados a proposé un filtre imitant la mise en page de la plateforme de Mark Zuckerberg. Les photos y sont aimées par « votre maman » et « un bot » russe, l’un des 50 000 faux comptes déployés par la Russie pour influencer l’élection présidentielle de 2016 aux Etats-Unis…

    Dans la Silicon Valley, les malheurs de Facebook ont été parfois durement commentés. « C’est une crise de confiance », a jugé Marc Benioff, le PDG du géant du logiciel Salesforce, qui, comme Elon Musk, de Tesla, s’est désinscrit du réseau social. Tim Cook a tancé son alter ego. Apple aussi aurait pu « faire des tonnes d’argent si elle avait transformé son client en produit, a-t-il pointé. Nous avons choisi de ne pas le faire ». « Zuck » a reconnu que Facebook monétise les données de ses usagers auprès des publicitaires. Mais à l’en croire, c’est par pur esprit humanitaire : pour offrir un service « qui ne soit pas accessible qu’aux riches ».

    Rares sont ceux, aujourd’hui aux Etats-Unis, qui défendent le réseau social aux 2 milliards d’inscrits, emblème, il y a peu encore, de la réussite planétaire des géants des technologies. Depuis la découverte des interférences russes dans l’élection de Donald Trump, Facebook est devenu le symbole de l’irresponsabilité globale des milliardaires du numérique – et la preuve des effets pervers du modèle économique de gratuité des réseaux sociaux.

    Le scandale Cambridge Analytica – du nom de la firme britannique de marketing politique liée à M. Trump qui a aspiré les données de 87 millions de comptes de Facebook en 2015 – a été la débâcle de trop. La Federal Trade Commission a ouvert une enquête qui pourrait valoir à Facebook une amende record. L’action a perdu 15 % en trois semaines (mais son cours avait doublé en trois ans).

    Depuis, chaque jour apporte un nouvel aveu. Oui, Facebook scanne les messages de tous les particuliers sur son application Messenger. Oui, Facebook suit les internautes, même quand ils n’ont pas téléchargé l’application (grâce au « mouchard » qui figure sur les sites qu’ils visitent). Selon une note interne de 2016 qui vient de fuiter, montrant à quel point l’affaire commence à éroder la culture d’une entreprise réputée pour sa cohésion, la croissance du nombre d’abonnés était devenue une obsession. Connecter toute la planète, l’ambition suprême. Et cela, « même si quelqu’un meurt dans une attaque terroriste coordonnée grâce à nos outils », précise cette note.

    Un genou à terre

    Zuckerberg-le-surdoué a un genou à terre. Selon un sondage publié le 2 avril par le site Axios, le taux de popularité de Facebook a chuté de 28 points entre octobre et mars (–12 pour Google et –13 pour Amazon). Le « nerd » asocial multiplie les interviews à un rythme effréné, alors qu’il n’en donnait jamais. Zuckerberg, qui se retranchait derrière son adjointe, Sheryl Sandberg, pour faire des politesses à Washington ou Bruxelles, a été obligé d’accepter de se présenter lui-même devant le Congrès : mardi 10 avril au Sénat, le lendemain à la Chambre.

    Deux jours d’audition. Ce sera une première pour un jeune milliardaire qui était revenu un jour de Washington en expliquant à ses employés, médusés, qu’il avait manifesté la « quantité de respect qui convenait » aux élus de la Nation : à savoir sa tenue habituelle, jean et tee-shirt. Aujourd’hui, l’indulgence risque d’être inversement proportionnelle à l’arrogance d’hier, même si Zuckerberg portera la cravate. Selon le New York Times, il a été « coaché » par une firme juridique, qui lui a enseigné à être « humble et agréable » dans ses réponses.

    La commission sénatoriale du commerce entend interroger le fondateur de Facebook sur son plan pour « regagner la confiance perdue », « sauvegarder la confidentialité des données des usagers » et « mettre fin à une série de réponses tardives à des problèmes importants ». « Zuck » aura du mal à restaurer sa crédibilité. Le magazine Wired s’est amusé à faire la liste de ses « excuses » : des dizaines depuis la création en 2003 à Harvard d’un site rassemblant les photos d’étudiantes piratées dans l’intranet de l’université. Quinze ans plus tard, il n’est pas à même de garantir que les données des 2 milliards d’inscrits n’ont pas été consultées à leur insu par des tiers.

    Mark Zuckerberg est-il de taille à affronter la crise ? Plusieurs actionnaires se sont interrogés publiquement sur son aptitude à diriger une compagnie devenue aussi tentaculaire. Le chef du fonds de pension de la ville de New York, Scott Stringer, l’a appelé à démissionner pour permettre à Facebook d’entamer « un deuxième chapitre, celui de l’amélioration de sa réputation ». Même analyse de la part du responsable du service économique du San Francisco Chronicle, Owen Thomas : « Le consensus qui se développe à Washington, dans la Silicon Valley et dans le reste du monde est que Facebook a besoin d’un changement radical, au-delà de l’avalanche d’annonces et de mises à jour des règles sur la vie privée. »

    Zuckerberg, septième fortune du monde (l’affaire Cambridge Analytica lui a coûté deux places), n’est certainement pas du style à s’effacer. « J’ai lancé cet endroit. Je le dirige », a-t-il signifié. Il a pris soin de conserver le contrôle du conseil d’administration et de 60 % des droits de vote des actionnaires. Nul ne peut l’écarter. A 33 ans, il préside une compagnie qui se retrouve en position d’arbitre du processus démocratique mondial. Cela, sans avoir de comptes à rendre à personne, à moins que le Congrès ne décide qu’il est temps de s’en mêler.

  • Tech Companies Are Under Pressure Everywhere Except Where It Matters
    https://theintercept.com/2018/01/31/trump-ftc-google-facebook-twitter

    It was the year of the tech backlash. Throughout 2017, Facebook, Google, and Twitter were hauled before Congress to answer for their roles in election hacking. More and more prominent political, business, and media figures warned of the growing power of the technology giants, and some offered solutions rarely uttered in this country : breaking the companies up and/or turning them into public utilities. At Davos last week, Salesforce.com CEO Marc Benioff attacked his fellow Silicon Valley (...)

    #Google #Facebook #domination #GAFAM #FTC

  • Who’s Afraid of George Soros? – Foreign Policy (10/10/2017) http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/10/10/whos-afraid-of-george-soros

    BUCHAREST, Romania — Last winter, in the middle of anti-corruption demonstrations, a television broadcaster accused George Soros — the Hungarian-born, Jewish-American billionaire philanthropist — of paying dogs to protest.

    The protests in Bucharest, sparked by dead-of-night legislation aimed at decriminalizing corruption, were the largest the country had seen since the fall of communism in 1989. Romania TV — a channel associated with, if not officially owned by, the government — alleged the protesters were paid.

    “Adults were paid 100 lei [$24], children earned 50 lei [$12.30], and dogs were paid 30 lei [$7.20],” one broadcaster said. 

    Some protesters responded by fitting their dogs with placards; others tucked money into their pets’ coats. One dog stood next to a sign reading, “Can anyone change 30 lei into euro?” Another dog wore one that read: “#George_Soros paid me to be here.”

    “The pro-government television, they lie all the time. In three sentences, they have five lies,” investigative journalist Andrei Astefanesei told Foreign Policy outside a gyro shop in Bucharest. “I told you about that lie, that Soros paid for dogs. ‘If you bring more dogs in the street, you get more money.’” He laughed.

    Romania TV was fined for its false claims about Soros. But the idea — that roughly half a million Romanians, and their dogs, came to the streets because Soros made them do it — struck a responsive chord. It’s similar to the idea that Soros is personally responsible for teaching students about LGBTQ rights in Romanian high schools; that Soros manipulated the teenagers who led this year’s anti-corruption protests in Slovakia; and that civil organizations and what’s left of the independent media in Hungary wouldn’t exist without Soros and his Open Society Foundations.

    The idea that the 87-year-old Soros is single-handedly stirring up discontent isn’t confined to the European side of the Atlantic; Soros conspiracies are a global phenomenon. In March, six U.S. senators signed a letter asking Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s staff to look into U.S. government funding going to Soros-backed organizations.

    “Our skepticism about Soros-funded groups undermining American priorities goes far beyond Eastern Europe,” said a spokesperson for Utah Sen. Mike Lee, who led the initiative, when asked if there was some specific piece of evidence of Soros-funded activity in Eastern Europe that prompted the letter or if concerns were more general.

    Soros has even been linked to former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who knelt during the national anthem to protest police brutality. “Congrats to Colin Kaepernick for popularizing the hatred of America. Good work, bro,” Tomi Lahren, a conservative commentator, tweeted during the controversy. “Your buddy George Soros is so proud. #istand.”

    On Twitter, Soros has also been held responsible for the recent Catalan independence referendum and the mass shooting in Las Vegas.

    But one of the places in which suspicion of Soros is most obvious is Central and Eastern Europe. There, Soros is not unlike the Mirror of Erised in Harry Potter, except that while the fictional mirror shows what the viewer most desires, Soros reflects back onto a country what it most hates.

    In Romania, where the head of the ruling party said Soros wants to do evil, the billionaire is not to be trusted because he’s Hungarian. In Hungary, where Prime Minister Viktor Orban has reportedly declared that Soros will be a main campaign theme in next year’s general election, he’s a traitor. And everywhere, he is Jewish, his very name a nod to the anti-Semitism that runs deep throughout the region.

    Now, Soros’s effectiveness as a bogeyman for conservative governments will be put to the test, literally. This week, Hungary is holding a “national consultation,” essentially a referendum designed to condemn Soros and his views on immigration. The government-funded questionnaire will be open to the country’s adult citizens and is meant to solicit their views on the Hungarian-born Holocaust survivor.

    “George Soros has bought people and organizations, and Brussels is under his influence,” Orban said in a radio interview Friday in the run-up to the consultation. “They want to demolish the fence, allow millions of immigrants into Europe, then distribute them using a mandatory mechanism — and they want to punish those who do not comply.”

    Soros declined an interview for this article, but a spokesperson for the Open Society Foundations, the main conduit for Soros’s philanthropic efforts, chalked up the backlash to his outspokenness. “He’s a man who stands up for his beliefs,” Laura Silber, a spokeswoman for the foundation, told FP. “That’s threatening when you’re speaking out against autocrats and corruption.”

    Blame and hatred of Soros are, to borrow from Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, a specter haunting Central and Eastern Europe. But how did an 87-year-old billionaire thousands of miles away become the region’s most famous ghost?

    #conspirationnisme

    • George Soros lègue 18 milliards de dollars à sa fondation
      http://www.latribune.fr/economie/international/george-soros-legue-18-milliards-de-dollars-a-sa-fondation-754607.html

      Open Society Foundations (OSF) a reçu 18 milliards de dollars (15,2 milliards d’euros) de ce grand donateur du parti démocrate américain, a indiqué à l’AFP une porte-parole. « Cette somme reflète un processus en cours de transfert des actifs » de M. Soros, « qui prévoit de laisser la vaste majorité de sa fortune à Open Society Foundations », a-t-elle souligné.

      Cette donation fait d’Open Society Foundations la deuxième plus riche ONG aux Etats-Unis après la Fondation Bill et Melinda Gates, qui dispose de 40 milliards de dollars pour promouvoir les problématiques de santé publique et de développement à travers le monde, d’après la National Philanthropic Trust.

      L’OSF est un réseau de 39 entités aux opérations interconnectées à travers le globe et fait la promotion de ses valeurs dans plus de 120 pays. La première a ouvert ses portes en 1984 en Hongrie, pays d’origine de M. Soros. La dernière a vu le jour en 2016 en Birmanie. George Soros en est le président et ses fils Alexander et Jonathan sont membres du conseil d’administration. D’autres de ses enfants sont également impliqués.

      Le milliardaire américain d’origine hongroise, connu pour ses paris financiers risqués, avait donné jusqu’à ce jour 12 milliards de dollars (10,2 milliards d’euros) de sa fortune à des oeuvres caritatives. Depuis des décennies, il donne environ entre 800 et 900 millions de dollars à des associations chaque année d’après des chiffres mentionnés par le New-York Times. C’est en 1979 que le financier avait fait son premier don en attribuant des bourses d’études à des élèves noirs sud-africains en plein Apartheid, rappelle OSF sur son site internet. Selon le président de la Ford Foundation, Darren Walker interrogé par le quotidien américain :

      "il n’y a aucune organisation caritative dans le monde, y compris la Ford Foundation, qui a plus d’impact que l’Open Society Foundations durant ces deux dernières décennies. [...] Parce qu’il n’y a aucun endroit dans le monde où ils ne sont pas présents. Leur empreinte est plus importante et plus conséquente que n’importe qu’elle organisation de justice sociale dans le monde".

      v/ @hadji

    • Soros turns antisocial: Billionaire says Facebook & Google manipulate users like gambling companies
      https://www.rt.com/news/417065-soros-social-media-blame

      Soros, whose investment fund owned over 300,000 shares in #Facebook until last November, said social media platforms are deliberately engineering “addiction to the services they provide.” Facebook and Google deceive their users by “manipulating their #attention and directing it towards their own commercial purposes,” he said.

      In this respect, online platforms have become similar to gambling companies, Soros asserted. “#Casinos have developed techniques to hook gamblers to the point where they gamble away all their money, even money they don’t have.

      “Something very harmful and maybe irreversible is happening to human attention in our digital age,” he said. Social media companies “are inducing people to give up their autonomy,” while the power to shape the public’s attention “is increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few companies.”

      The billionaire financier, whom the Hungarian government has labeled a “political puppet master,” then struck an even gloomier tone by offering a full-on dystopian conspiracy theory.

      In future, there could be “an alliance between authoritarian states and these large, data-rich IT monopolies,” in which tech giants’ corporate surveillance would merge with “an already developed system of state-sponsored surveillance,” he said.

      That “may well result in a web of totalitarian control the likes of which not even Aldous Huxley or George Orwell could have imagined,” he said, referring to the British authors of two famous dystopian novels.

      Last year, some tech corporations fell out of favor with Soros when his investment fund sold 367,262 shares in Facebook, although he chose to keep 109,451 of the network’s shares. Soros’ fund also offloaded 1,700 shares in Apple and 1.55 million in the owners of Snapchat. It also reduced its stake in Twitter by 5,700 shares, while still holding 18,400 shares in the social media service.

      Soros was not the only Davos speaker to launch a verbal attack on Big Tech. American entrepreneur and Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff said on Tuesday that Facebook should be regulated just like a tobacco company.

      “I think you’d do it exactly the same way you regulate the cigarette industry. Here’s a product, cigarettes, they are addictive, they are not good for you,” Benioff said. “Maybe there is all kinds of different forces trying to get you to do certain things. There are a lot of parallels.”

  • Salesforce created an algorithm that automatically summarizes text using machine learning
    https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/14/15637588/salesforce-algorithm-automatically-summarizes-text-machine-learning-ai

    This year, people are expected to spend more than half their day reading e-mail, articles, or posts on social media, and it’s only going to get worse. To help solve this problem, researchers at Salesforce have developed an algorithm that uses machine learning to produce “surprisingly coherent and accurate” summaries according to MIT Technology Review. Automatic summarization would be a particularly useful technology for Salesforce, which produces a variety of customer-service focused products. The company notes that the resulting summaries could be used by sales or customer service representatives to quickly digest e-mails and information, which would allow them to spend more time focused on their customers. To that end, Salesforce is... Continue (...)

  • « Bahamas Leaks » : la société offshore cachée de l’ex-commissaire européenne à la concurrence
    https://www.crashdebug.fr/international/12377-bahamas-leaks-la-societe-offshore-cachee-de-l-ex-commissaire-europe

    Neelie Kroes a été directrice, entre 2000 et 2009, d’une société enregistrée aux Bahamas, dont l’existence

    n’a jamais été révélée à Bruxelles.

    Le Monde et les médias partenaires du Consortium #International des journalistes d’investigation (ICIJ) ont eu accès à de nouveaux documents confidentiels, les « Bahamas Leaks », portant sur l’équivalent d’un « registre du commerce » bahamien. Parmi les plus de 175 000 structures offshore enregistrées dans ce paradis fiscal depuis 1990, certaines sont liées à des personnalités politiques de premier plan.

    Les « Bahamas Leaks » en bref

    Cinq mois après les « Panama papers », Le Monde et ses partenaires du consortium international des journalistes d’investigation (ICIJ) ont eu accès à de nouveaux documents confidentiels sur le monde opaque des paradis fiscaux : les « Bahamas (...)

    #En_vedette #Ça_s'est_dit_par_là...

    • Missiles, énergie, banque, les nébuleux intérêts d’une ex-commissaire de l’UE RTS Pauline Turuban
      http://www.rts.ch/info/monde/8035884-missiles-energie-banque-les-nebuleux-interets-d-une-ex-commissaire-de-l-

      Mise en cause dans les Bahamas Leaks pour une société offshore non déclarée, ce n’est pas la première fois que Neelie Kroes, ex-commissaire européenne à la Concurrence, est visée pour ses liens ambigus avec le secteur privé.

      L’ex-commissaire européenne Neelie Kroes a dirigé entre 2000 et 2009 une société offshore enregistrée aux Bahamas, à l’insu des autorités bruxelloises, a affirmé mercredi Le Monde qui a eu accès aux Bahamas Leaks.

      Selon le quotidien français, ladite société, Mint Holdings Limited, devait à l’origine servir à racheter plus de 6 milliards de dollars d’actifs à la branche internationale énergie d’Enron. L’opération financière est tombée à l’eau mais la société, elle, a poursuivi d’autres activités, dont Le Monde dit ignorer la nature.

      Neelie Kroes plaide l’"omission"
      Nommée commissaire à la concurrence au sein de la commission Barroso I en 2004, Neelie Kroes n’a lâché ses fonctions d’administratrice de Mint Holdings qu’en 2009, deux mois avant de changer de portefeuille pour devenir commissaire à la société numérique.

      La Néerlandaise n’a jamais fait mention de sa société offshore dans sa déclaration d’intérêts, alors même que ses fonctions de gendarme des pratiques commerciales européennes l’amenaient à orchestrer la libéralisation du marché de l’énergie - un lien direct avec les activités d’Enron.

      Contactée par Le Monde, Neelie Kroes a admis avoir été nommée « directrice non exécutive » de Mint Holdings et expliqué avoir « omis » de mettre la Commission au courant. Elle a ajouté n’avoir tiré aucun avantage financier de cette société.

      Lobbyiste pour une multinationale de défense
      Les nombreux liens de Neelie Kroes avec le monde économique ont déjà été pointés du doigt par le passé. Lorsqu’elle intègre l’organe exécutif de l’UE en 2004, Neelie Kroes a 63 ans et déjà une longue carrière derrière elle, en politique - elle a notamment été ministre des Transports aux Pays-Bas - mais surtout dans les affaires.

      Sa déclaration d’entrée en fonction fait ainsi état de 25 liens d’intérêts, dont plusieurs au sein de conseils d’administration. Bien avant les révélations sur Mint Holdings Limited, le Wall Street Journal y relève déjà une autre omission d’importance.

      Dans un article daté d’octobre 2004, le quotidien américain accuse Neelie Kroes de ne pas avoir déclaré une mission menée entre 1996 et 1997 en tant que lobbyiste pour la division « missiles » de l’entreprise de défense américaine Lockheed Martin Corp.

      Or, selon le Wall Street Journal, Lockheed est à l’époque étroitement lié à des entreprises faisant l’objet d’une investigation de la part de la commission de la concurrence.

      Un risque de conflit d’intérêts admis par les officiels européens
      Dans ce même article, des officiels européens admettent n’avoir jamais eu affaire à un candidat ayant autant de liens avec le monde des affaires, et représentant donc un tel risque de conflit d’intérêts.

      Mais « le défi que représente la gestion de ses conflits d’intérêts est un petit prix à payer pour bénéficier de son expérience du business », selon les termes de l’un d’entre eux.

      Pour rassurer, Neelie Kroes donne toutefois quelques gages : elle promet à José Manuel Barroso qu’elle ne traitera aucun dossier impliquant des conseils d’administration au sein desquels elle a siégé. Surtout, elle promet qu’elle n’acceptera plus d’activité commerciale à l’issue de son premier mandat à la Commission européenne.

      Promesse non tenue
      Douze ans et un deuxième mandat à la Commission européenne plus tard, force est de constater que la promesse n’a pas été tenue. En mars 2015, Neelie Kroes a été nommée « conseillère spéciale » pour la banque Merrill Lynch.

      Au printemps 2016, l’ex-commissaire européenne à la société numérique a en outre rejoint les conseils d’administration de deux géants de l’économie digitale, Salesforce et Uber. Des reconversions qui ont toutes reçu l’aval de Bruxelles.

  • « #Bahamas_Leaks » : l’ex-commissaire européenne à la concurrence avait une société offshore cachée
    http://www.lemonde.fr/evasion-fiscale/article/2016/09/21/bahamas-leaks-l-ex-commissaire-europeenne-a-la-concurrence-avait-une-societe

    Classée cinq années de suite parmi les femmes les plus puissantes du monde par le magazine Forbes, #Neelie_Kroes, ex-commissaire européenne à la concurrence (2004-2009) de la Commission #Barroso, a été directrice, entre 2000 et 2009, de Mint Holdings Limited, une société enregistrée aux Bahamas. Selon nos informations, l’existence de cette société offshore n’a jamais été révélée aux autorités bruxelloises comme elle aurait pourtant dû l’être dans les déclarations d’intérêt remplies par Mme Kroes à son entrée en poste. Elle y affirmait pourtant avoir abandonné tous ses mandats avant son entrée à la Commission.

    #commission_européenne #évasion_fiscale

    • Missiles, énergie, banque, les nébuleux intérêts d’une ex-commissaire de l’UE RTS Pauline Turuban
      http://www.rts.ch/info/monde/8035884-missiles-energie-banque-les-nebuleux-interets-d-une-ex-commissaire-de-l-

      Mise en cause dans les Bahamas Leaks pour une société offshore non déclarée, ce n’est pas la première fois que Neelie Kroes, ex-commissaire européenne à la Concurrence, est visée pour ses liens ambigus avec le secteur privé.

      L’ex-commissaire européenne Neelie Kroes a dirigé entre 2000 et 2009 une société offshore enregistrée aux Bahamas, à l’insu des autorités bruxelloises, a affirmé mercredi Le Monde qui a eu accès aux Bahamas Leaks.

      Selon le quotidien français, ladite société, Mint Holdings Limited, devait à l’origine servir à racheter plus de 6 milliards de dollars d’actifs à la branche internationale énergie d’Enron. L’opération financière est tombée à l’eau mais la société, elle, a poursuivi d’autres activités, dont Le Monde dit ignorer la nature.

      Neelie Kroes plaide l’"omission"
      Nommée commissaire à la concurrence au sein de la commission Barroso I en 2004, Neelie Kroes n’a lâché ses fonctions d’administratrice de Mint Holdings qu’en 2009, deux mois avant de changer de portefeuille pour devenir commissaire à la société numérique.

      La Néerlandaise n’a jamais fait mention de sa société offshore dans sa déclaration d’intérêts, alors même que ses fonctions de gendarme des pratiques commerciales européennes l’amenaient à orchestrer la libéralisation du marché de l’énergie - un lien direct avec les activités d’Enron.

      Contactée par Le Monde, Neelie Kroes a admis avoir été nommée "directrice non exécutive" de Mint Holdings et expliqué avoir « omis » de mettre la Commission au courant. Elle a ajouté n’avoir tiré aucun avantage financier de cette société.

      Lobbyiste pour une multinationale de défense
      Les nombreux liens de Neelie Kroes avec le monde économique ont déjà été pointés du doigt par le passé. Lorsqu’elle intègre l’organe exécutif de l’UE en 2004, Neelie Kroes a 63 ans et déjà une longue carrière derrière elle, en politique - elle a notamment été ministre des Transports aux Pays-Bas - mais surtout dans les affaires.

      Sa déclaration d’entrée en fonction fait ainsi état de 25 liens d’intérêts, dont plusieurs au sein de conseils d’administration. Bien avant les révélations sur Mint Holdings Limited, le Wall Street Journal y relève déjà une autre omission d’importance.

      Dans un article daté d’octobre 2004, le quotidien américain accuse Neelie Kroes de ne pas avoir déclaré une mission menée entre 1996 et 1997 en tant que lobbyiste pour la division « missiles » de l’entreprise de défense américaine Lockheed Martin Corp.

      Or, selon le Wall Street Journal, Lockheed est à l’époque étroitement lié à des entreprises faisant l’objet d’une investigation de la part de la commission de la concurrence.

      Un risque de conflit d’intérêts admis par les officiels européens
      Dans ce même article, des officiels européens admettent n’avoir jamais eu affaire à un candidat ayant autant de liens avec le monde des affaires, et représentant donc un tel risque de conflit d’intérêts.

      Mais « le défi que représente la gestion de ses conflits d’intérêts est un petit prix à payer pour bénéficier de son expérience du business », selon les termes de l’un d’entre eux.

      Pour rassurer, Neelie Kroes donne toutefois quelques gages : elle promet à José Manuel Barroso qu’elle ne traitera aucun dossier impliquant des conseils d’administration au sein desquels elle a siégé. Surtout, elle promet qu’elle n’acceptera plus d’activité commerciale à l’issue de son premier mandat à la Commission européenne.

      Promesse non tenue
      Douze ans et un deuxième mandat à la Commission européenne plus tard, force est de constater que la promesse n’a pas été tenue. En mars 2015, Neelie Kroes a été nommée « conseillère spéciale » pour la banque Merrill Lynch.

      Au printemps 2016, l’ex-commissaire européenne à la société numérique a en outre rejoint les conseils d’administration de deux géants de l’économie digitale, Salesforce et Uber. Des reconversions qui ont toutes reçu l’aval de Bruxelles.

  • L’ex-commissaire européenne Neelie Kroes va à la soupe chez uber

    Uber se dote d’un comité de conseil de 8 personnalités, dont l’ex-commissaire Kroes, Belga 5 Mai 2016


    Source : http://www.rtbf.be/info/medias/detail_uber-se-dote-d-un-comite-de-conseil-de-8-personnalites-dont-l-ex-commiss

    (Belga) L’ex-commissaire européenne Neelie Kroes et une série d’autres personnalités politiques et économiques de plusieurs continents ont rejoint un comité chargé de conseiller le controversé service américain de réservation mobile de voiture avec chauffeur Uber.
    Ce dernier a annoncé mercredi sur son blog officiel avoir organisé cette semaine la première réunion de son « comité de conseil en politique publique ». Appelé à siéger deux fois par an, il doit conseiller l’entreprise sur des questions de régulation, de politiques publiques ou d’image, a détaillé un porte-parole.

    Neelie Kroes avait été chargée successivement à la Commission européenne des questions de concurrence, puis des nouvelles technologies.
    Elle avait notamment apporté son soutien à Uber en 2014 quand la justice belge avait ordonné à la société américaine de cesser ses activités de covoiturage entre particuliers (UberPop) à Bruxelles, se disant « scandalisée » face à une décision qui « protège un cartel de taxis ».

    La liste de 8 personnalités publiée par Uber sur son blog comprend aussi notamment l’ancien secrétaire américain aux Transports Ray LaHood, l’ex-président de l’autorité de la concurrence australienne Allan Fels, un ex-Premier ministre péruvien, Roberto Danino, ou encore la princesse saoudienne Reema Bint Bandar Al Saud.
    Uber est l’une des startups non cotées les plus en vue de la Silicon Valley, avec une valorisation estimée à une cinquantaine de milliards de dollars, mais sa croissance très rapide s’est accompagnée de nombreuses polémiques : les taxis traditionnels l’accusent de concurrence illégales, et plusieurs villes ont interdit le service, dont Bruxelles à la suite de deux jugements intervenus en 2014 et 2015.

    #L'Europe_en_mieux http://seenthis.net/people/uef_france http://seenthis.net/people/taurillon #Citoyenneté_européenne #Europe #euro #UEF #union_européenne #Commission_européenne #Corruption #Marché_commun #Europe_à_l'école #à_la_soupe

    • Missiles, énergie, banque, les nébuleux intérêts d’une ex-commissaire de l’UE RTS Pauline Turuban
      http://www.rts.ch/info/monde/8035884-missiles-energie-banque-les-nebuleux-interets-d-une-ex-commissaire-de-l-

      Mise en cause dans les Bahamas Leaks pour une société offshore non déclarée, ce n’est pas la première fois que Neelie Kroes, ex-commissaire européenne à la Concurrence, est visée pour ses liens ambigus avec le secteur privé.

      L’ex-commissaire européenne Neelie Kroes a dirigé entre 2000 et 2009 une société offshore enregistrée aux Bahamas, à l’insu des autorités bruxelloises, a affirmé mercredi Le Monde qui a eu accès aux Bahamas Leaks.

      Selon le quotidien français, ladite société, Mint Holdings Limited, devait à l’origine servir à racheter plus de 6 milliards de dollars d’actifs à la branche internationale énergie d’Enron. L’opération financière est tombée à l’eau mais la société, elle, a poursuivi d’autres activités, dont Le Monde dit ignorer la nature.

      Neelie Kroes plaide l’"omission"
      Nommée commissaire à la concurrence au sein de la commission Barroso I en 2004, Neelie Kroes n’a lâché ses fonctions d’administratrice de Mint Holdings qu’en 2009, deux mois avant de changer de portefeuille pour devenir commissaire à la société numérique.

      La Néerlandaise n’a jamais fait mention de sa société offshore dans sa déclaration d’intérêts, alors même que ses fonctions de gendarme des pratiques commerciales européennes l’amenaient à orchestrer la libéralisation du marché de l’énergie - un lien direct avec les activités d’Enron.

      Contactée par Le Monde, Neelie Kroes a admis avoir été nommée « directrice non exécutive » de Mint Holdings et expliqué avoir « omis » de mettre la Commission au courant. Elle a ajouté n’avoir tiré aucun avantage financier de cette société.

      Lobbyiste pour une multinationale de défense
      Les nombreux liens de Neelie Kroes avec le monde économique ont déjà été pointés du doigt par le passé. Lorsqu’elle intègre l’organe exécutif de l’UE en 2004, Neelie Kroes a 63 ans et déjà une longue carrière derrière elle, en politique - elle a notamment été ministre des Transports aux Pays-Bas - mais surtout dans les affaires.

      Sa déclaration d’entrée en fonction fait ainsi état de 25 liens d’intérêts, dont plusieurs au sein de conseils d’administration. Bien avant les révélations sur Mint Holdings Limited, le Wall Street Journal y relève déjà une autre omission d’importance.

      Dans un article daté d’octobre 2004, le quotidien américain accuse Neelie Kroes de ne pas avoir déclaré une mission menée entre 1996 et 1997 en tant que lobbyiste pour la division « missiles » de l’entreprise de défense américaine Lockheed Martin Corp.

      Or, selon le Wall Street Journal, Lockheed est à l’époque étroitement lié à des entreprises faisant l’objet d’une investigation de la part de la commission de la concurrence.

      Un risque de conflit d’intérêts admis par les officiels européens
      Dans ce même article, des officiels européens admettent n’avoir jamais eu affaire à un candidat ayant autant de liens avec le monde des affaires, et représentant donc un tel risque de conflit d’intérêts.

      Mais « le défi que représente la gestion de ses conflits d’intérêts est un petit prix à payer pour bénéficier de son expérience du business », selon les termes de l’un d’entre eux.

      Pour rassurer, Neelie Kroes donne toutefois quelques gages : elle promet à José Manuel Barroso qu’elle ne traitera aucun dossier impliquant des conseils d’administration au sein desquels elle a siégé. Surtout, elle promet qu’elle n’acceptera plus d’activité commerciale à l’issue de son premier mandat à la Commission européenne.

      Promesse non tenue
      Douze ans et un deuxième mandat à la Commission européenne plus tard, force est de constater que la promesse n’a pas été tenue. En mars 2015, Neelie Kroes a été nommée « conseillère spéciale » pour la banque Merrill Lynch.

      Au printemps 2016, l’ex-commissaire européenne à la société numérique a en outre rejoint les conseils d’administration de deux géants de l’économie digitale, Salesforce et Uber. Des reconversions qui ont toutes reçu l’aval de Bruxelles.

  • Salesforce buys machine learning startup PredictionIO
    http://www.zdnet.com/article/salesforce-buys-machine-learning-startup-predictionio

    “PredictionIO, a small startup that provides its technology open source, said it will be used to bolster SalesforceIQ’s machine learning. PredictionIO is a machine learning server. Data scientists generally use PredictionIO to evaluate models, create components and sample information.”

    #machine_learning_Salesforce_PredictionIO_marché_acquisition_beclever

  • Looking Beyond the Internet of Things
    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/02/technology/looking-beyond-the-internet-of-things.html

    Salesforce, which is worth $54 billion, is an underdog compared to that tiny group of tech behemoths. It lacks global data centers, but does control important data, like information about what customers are buying.

    Who will ultimately control that data, from the sensors to the cloud and back, is one of the most contentious questions in tech.

    “You’ve got Amazon knowing everything about purchasing, Google knowing everything about what people do on the Internet, and Salesforce knowing everything about the revenue side of a business,” said Scott Raney, a venture capitalist at Redpoint Ventures who invests in companies related to what Mr. Bosworth is working on.

    “Lay computer processing on all that, and it’s powerful to a point where a little creepiness sets in; no one else will have the data,” he added. “I’m buying the stock of all the companies. I just hope they’ll be benevolent dictators.”

  • SalesLoft shoots money into San Fran - Business Insider
    http://uk.businessinsider.com/dreamforce-15-salesloft-shoots-money-guns-into-san-francisco-201

    It should hardly come as a surprise that Salesforce’s Dreamforce conference, which took place in San Francisco this week, would provide an abundance of material for anyone looking for evidence of a tech bubble.
    More than 170,000 techies poured into San Francisco for the big event, which has been described as Burning Man for the enterprise-software business.

    Fleets of pedicabs shuttled visitors around the city, a giant concert featuring the band Foo Fighters was held on the waterfront, and a massive cruise ship was docked by the bay to accommodate those unable to secure a hotel room.

    But the zeitgeist may have best been captured during a brief moment earlier in the week, when real money was actually fired out of guns into the streets.

  • Dropbox adds former Secretary of State Rice to board | ZDNet
    http://www.zdnet.com/dropbox-adds-former-secretary-of-state-rice-to-board-7000028264

    Vous utilisez #Dropbox? Condoleezza Rice vous remercie

    here are a lot of former Secretaries of State getting involved in the tech world these days.

    First, Salesforce.com announced last month that General Colin Powell had joined the CRM giant’s Board of Directors.

    Just yesterday, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton made headlines with an appearance at Marketo’s customer summit in San Francisco. (Albeit, most of the spotlight turned toward Clinton admitting she was thinking about running for president in 2016 more so than comments about the role of social media in diplomacy.)

    Now Dropbox is following suit.

    Revealed much more quietly amid the hubbub over Dropbox for Business upgrades and the new Carousel app, the cloud company made three leadership introductions on Wednesday, headlined by Dr. Condoleezza Rice being appointed to the board.

    #BigBusiness #Politics #NSA_mais_non

  • The best of two worlds ?

    OpenID Connect als Standard ratifiziert
    http://www.heise.de/open/meldung/OpenID-Connect-als-Standard-ratifiziert-2126073.html

    Der von Unternehmen wie Google, Microsoft, Deutsche Telekom und Salesforce.com ausgearbeitete Standard soll über kurz oder lang OpenID 2.0 im Web ablösen – auch dank der ungemeinen Popularität von OAuth.

    OpenID Connect FAQ and Q&As | OpenID
    http://openid.net/connect/faq

    OpenID Connect is an interoperable authentication protocol based on the OAuth 2.0 family of specifications. It uses straightforward REST/JSON message flows with a design goal of “making simple things simple and complicated things possible”. It’s uniquely easy for developers to integrate, compared to any preceding Identity protocol.

    OpenID Connect lets developers authenticate their users across websites and apps without having to own and manage password files. For the app builder, it provides a secure verifiable, answer to the question: “What is the identity of the person currently using the browser or native app that is connected to me?”

    OpenID Connect allows for clients of all types, including browser-based JavaScript and native mobile apps, to launch sign-in flows and receive verifiable assertions about the identity of signed-in users.

    http://www.vevo.com/watch/hannah-montana/the-best-of-both-worlds/USWV20620226

    ;-)