Why the Parallel Existence of Homonyms causes Identity Confusion, Imposture, Theft and Usurpation from the USA-led Information Technology Industry
Țin a analiza in cele prezentate mai jos o coincidenta periculoasa în ceea-ce mă privește, care in trecut a dat explicit loc la nocive confuzii de persoane, precum si implicit la multiple forme de uzurpare, datorate existentei paralele a unui omonim, adică o persoana pe nume tot Dan TEODOSIU, născut cu trei ani după mine tot la București însa pitic si handicapat motoric, care a urmat ca si mine tot Școala Germana din București, apoi a studiat tot la Facultatea de Automatica si Calculatoare a Universității (Institutului) Politehnic(e) București, emigrând tot in Europa de Vest (in 1992) ca si mine in prealabil (in 1984), si a lucrat in Occident tot la un Master si la un Doctorat in Informatica (in SUA, ambele la Mendel ROSENBLUM) ca si mine (însa in Europa de Vest, la Volker DIEKERT in Germania si Paul GASTIN in Franța), o coincidenta de parcurs ieșita din comun despre care eu nu am știut nimic pana in 1996 când m-am întâlnit cu acest omonim la Paris la inițiativa sa.
In prezent aceasta persoana conduce in Franța o firma multinaționala de profil american numita CriTeo, care in mod regretabil este specializata, in monitorizarea (cu scopul spionării), modelizarea (cu scopul simulării) si ghidarea (cu scopul adictionarii) comportamentului utilizatorilor de calculatore personale, ca însăși serviciul de comercializare prin profilare si promovare oferit clienților săi internaționali, la rândul lor dependenți de plasarea propriilor produse in acest mod agresiv in scopul creșterii propriei marje de profit in concurenta eliminatorie care guvernează actualmente piața occidentala de tehnologii informaționale.
Pentru comparația directa a persoanei mele cu cea a omonimului, care a avut un parcurs profesional a cărui orientare a devenit egocentrista si belicoasa in raport cu educația elitista si curata de care a beneficiat ca si mine in Romania, spre deosebire de orientarea mea care a fost întotdeauna universalista si echilibrata, am redactat si inclus pe lângă comentarii generale cate un CV pentru mine si omonim, împreuna cu o tabela care conține criterii de clasificare intre mine si omonim, care cred ca ar trebui discutate si difuzate de către cei surprinși de coincidente sau interesați de acest fenomen de asemănare si distingere, cu rugămintea de a-mi comunica datele care lipsesc.
Link-urile de la începutul paginii conțin posibile efecte negative generale si specifice corelate de circumstanțele descrise mai jos.
I will start with the simple but dangerous coincidence concerning my own person caused by the odd, awkward and astounding parallel existence of a person bearing the same fore- and surname ‘Dan TEODOSIU’, which I shall call a homonym, person which is born about three years after myself and of whose lineage, existence and life I astonishingly knew absolutely nothing, and inadequately cared even less about, up to my advanced age of 32 years,
1. born in the same town ‘BUCHAREST’ as myself,
2. attending for 12 long years the same “German School” in BUCHAREST as I had previously done,
3. developing some of my professional interests by starting to study at the same
faculty ‘Automatics and Computers’ of the ‘Polytechnical University BUCHAREST’ as myself,
4. obtaining in the USA a ‘Ph.D in Information Technology (IT)’ in 2000 working under the supervision of Prof. Mendel ROSENBLUM, Stanford University, pretending to belong to a mathematics genealogy, as misleadingly reflected by the ‘Mathematics Genealogy Project’ (MGP), while my own French ‘Ph.D in Computer Science (CS)’ defended in 2012 at Paris 7/Diderot University before a jury presided by Pierre-Louis CURIEN, Directeur de Recherche at CNRS, indeed is part of both mathematics and logics, as later on reflected by MGP, after myself partly correcting this form of usurpation,
5. and finally, living in the same “17e Arrondissement de PARIS” some years later than myself and inhabiting an apartment proximous to the well-known “Gare Saint-Lazare” as myself,
to name but a few of the strikingly extreme similarities, conspicuously induced in this person’s biographical path from my own, while being both ‘guided by the invisible hand’ (as Adam Smith describes the societal benefit from the pursuit of personal happiness), that therefore seems to be responsible for this circumstance.
After finishing my Master in Mathematics and my Master in Computer Science at Stuttgart/Germany in 1993 under the supervision of Prof. Volker DIEKERT, I pursued a PhD thesis in Theoretical Computer Science in Paris/France under the supervision of Prof. Paul GASTIN, in parallel with a path of public research in the EU-coordinated State-financed Computer-Science (CS) being employed by the French Ministry of Education and Research, the University Paris 6/7-Curie/Diderot in financially ever more insufficiently supported higher scientifically-oriented positions and in the US-Styled French Automotive Industry. I have specialized ever more in the public or open Research & Development of universal interest, developing ever more abstract concurrent process semantics used to the purpose of describing the evolution and behaviour of real systems. My preoccupations turn around the design and specification of small distributed logical machines that allow treating ever more complex behaviour, ever more elegantly, with ever less signs and rules, time and space, that liberate humans from logical dependencies, deficiencies, and traps. Therefore, this activity can be understood to embody a classical angelic view in modern form, which develops a balanced and idealistic platonic programme endeavouring to disseminate open-source knowledge of high positive value to others.
After finishing his Master in Computer Science in 1996 and his PhD in Information Technology in 2000 at Stanford/USA under the supervision of Prof. Mendel ROSENBLUM, the homonym pursued a career of private development in the USA-led Industry-financed Information-Technology (IT) being employed by HP, Microsoft and Google in ever higher technologically-oriented positions and in the US-styled French IT-industry being employed in the Paris-Area by the French start-up VirtuOz as CTO and the French multinational CriTeo as CEO. He specialized ever more in closed or private Research & Development for the promotion (commercialization) of services for international clients by automatic end user profiling, that are based on monitoring (spying), modelling (simulating) and guiding (addicting) the user’s (consumer’s) behaviour to the profit of the clients (producers). His preoccupation turn around designing and implementing big distributed logical machines that run on ever larger and distributed server-farms, which treat ever more rapidly, ever larger masses of behavioural data in ever less tics and seconds, bytes and words, that chain humans into logical dependencies, deficiencies, and traps. Therefore, this activity can be understood to embody a classical demonic view in modern form, which develops a realistic and tyrannical darwinistic programme endeavouring to collect closed-source information of high negative effectiveness onto others.
I venture to state the general remark that along my life-path I have been striving to involve and make use of the interface to private interests to the measure of it being necessary in order to further the dissemination of universal/public interests, services and views, which represent the basis of my/our existence, adopting an ever more ethic, moral, angelic, and deontological attitude, while for the homonym the reverse is valid, namely, that along his life-path he has been striving to involve and make use of the interface to public interests to the measure of it being necessary in order to promote the commercialization of own/private interests, services and views, which represent the basis of his/their existence, adopting an ever more unethical, immoral, demonic and unscrupulous attitude.
As a tentative explanation of the differing life-psychology between myself and the homonym, I suspect that contrary to him I have been confronted already as a young man with circumstances of complex and played psychological character such as my arranged retention for 2 weeks in the psychiatric hospital in Bucharest for a depression simulated by me in order to be absolved from the military service and start my university studies without delay. At that occasion I have learned that one can enter and get involved into a particular psychological state, enact a role determined by this condition in a manner much resembling the play of an actor on a scene or in a movie, and then get disinvolved and exit the psychological state. Ever since, I have developed an interest in displayed (authentic, genuine) and played (pretended, fake) psychology as it is identifiable in the behaviour of humans including myself, interest that lead to a sense of responsibility toward those displaying psychological affections and segregated from society to their own damage by defenceless honesty, and a rejection toward those playing psychological traits and eager to penetrate the society to their own benefit by aggressive dishonesty.
The explicit concurrency and implicit competition of the homonym’s egocentric, self-interested and particular global view evolving in parallel with my own altruistic, balanced and universal world-view has caused over time numerous inter-correlations and side-effects, which I have decided to record and analyse below because of the private and public interest that the phenomenon might generate.
For the sake of further comparisons and conclusions one can read the LinkedIn pages of myself and the homonym. Furthermore, one can compare my CV with the CV of the homonym, which I have taken the time to write in Romanian, as well as the following table of facts expressed in Romanian concerning myself and the homonym, facts presented according to classification criteria that allow drawing conclusions as to existing or induced similarities and dissimilarities.
Criterii de clasificare a relației (X,X‘) intre genuinul X si omonimul X’
Upon the initiative of the homonym I accepted in 1996 to meet in a Parisian café near the Notre Dame Cathedral in order to make acquaintance. On this occasion I was struck by one particular idea of the homonym, namely his earnest proposal that we both should join our lists of publications in order for each one to have more published articles and conference appearances. He was manifestly not conscious that this proposal amounted to a grave form of imposture toward thirds, to say nothing about the fact that I personally would not be willing to sign for contributions of thirds which I have not had the occasion to analyse and modify, and that I therefore would never accept such a mixture of conception and even personality.
One of the disturbing consequences of the above circumstances that I observed over time is for instance the eventual mixing of our identities in public and private reference collections, containing pointers to both, my own contributions and those pretended by the above homonym and his co-authors.
For example, in the well-known publicly supported ’Computer Science Bibliography Database’ DBLP, the initially confusing or even misleading unique reference page to my name was split, only after my explicit request, into two separate pages, one page for myself, containing my articles published after year 2K about fully abstract semantics for concurrent processes languages, domain which is indeed intimate part of Computer Science (CS), and one page for the homonym, containing his articles, all published before year 2K, and co-authored by his colleagues and his PhD thesis supervisor, which indeed have something to do with Information Technology (IT) but otherwise little to do with Computer Science (CS) per se (which DBLP pretends to index) – a more subtle imposture of substituting science by technology, and therefore an even more dangerous one nowadays, precisely because of this attribute.
On the other hand the Microsoft corporation privately developing the Microsoft Academic Search engine seems to be unable or unwilling to properly handle the bibliography of persons of equal name, since it did not even reply to my explicit request of splitting their unique page to their former employee Dan TEODOSIU, which fraudulently included my own contributions, and therefore represented a clear form of identity usurpation, into two different pages, one for their ex-employee and one for myself. Microsoft simply decided to render the unique page inaccessible to the outside, redirecting it to the very root of the site Microsoft Academic, which pretends to interface to a ‘semantic’ search engine, that obviously is incapable or uninterested in internally implementing and externally offering the minimal ‘semantical’ service of separating the view on persons of equal name but distinct identity. So much as to how presumptuously notions like ‘semantic’ are misused by the ‘state of the art’ of present Information Technology.
To name a third well-known example I will mention the publicly supported ACM Digital Library whose unique page to my name Dan TEODOSIU affiliates this ‘virtual’ person to both the Université Paris 7 (Diderot), where I myself graduated from, and to the Stanford University, where the homonym graduated from, recollecting as bibliographic entries both my own and the homonym’s contributions. Upon my explicit request to split their unique page into two different pages this site’s administration decided to leave everything unchanged, thus continuing the generated confusion of identity from my point of view. Similarly, the unique page to my name Dan TEODOSIU at OdySci Academic on one hand affiliates this virtual person to the Stanford University where the homonym graduated from but on the other hand also references my publications, thus creating not only a case of identity mixture and confusion but even worse, one of Intellectual Property (IP) theft.
Concerning the usage of the attribute ‘semantic’ one can also note the case of the site Semantic Scholar, which equally contains a unique entry to a ‘virtual’ person ‘Dan TEODOSIU’ mixing my publications with those of the homonym and therefore represents a clear form of identity usurpation. Nevertheless, the unique profile of this ‘virtual’ person, considered to be a semantic scholar, only refers to the homonym’s professional relations while completely ignoring my own conceptual lineage. All of the homonym’s publications do not deal with Computer Science (CS) but deal exclusively with Information Technology (IT), a field of human activity applying concepts in particular senses that consistently underrate the general sense of formal concepts defined in Computer Science, by overstressing applications of these concepts which are much more particular than the abstractions attached to them, concepts of CS which are thus lowered, mistreated and misused for as long as they are considered to be trendy in IT, in itself a grave form of usurpation of general by particular sense. Viewed from this indeed scholar perspective the homonym, who is not a scholar but an executive and, moreover, doesn’t endeavour upon the sense but at the best strives for the application of academic terms, would fit more properly in an engine named ‘Syntactic Executive’ than in an engine named ‘Semantic Scholar’, a remark that rather accurately describes the lack of insight and scrutiny of the above site.
I will refrain from further commenting the way corporations like Microsoft, Google and Yahoo deal with the above mentioned name to person semantical mapping problem in their so-called ‘semantical’ search engines but just note that as a response to the simple entry of the words ‘Dan TEODOSIU’, all of them first enumerate references to pages and images of the homonym and only afterwards to those of my own, while using search algorithms which implement a link choice ‘semantics’ that has always been a mystery to the onlookers inspecting their search results. The made for some time an exception to the above remark.
The only notable exceptions to the above semantic treatment of homonyms that I have encountered on the internet when querying search engines for my name ‘Dan Teodosiu’, were the Russian search engine Yandex for some time, until it rapidly changed the link order entirely to the benefit of the homonym without any objective reason, the site CS Authors.net (which not only splits pages to different persons of equal name but also includes a reference to their homepage) as well as the Chinese search engine Baidu that returns as the first link a reference to my profile page at the site Research Gate.com.
Regarding the treatment of my contributions the most drastic example of Intellectual Property (IP) theft and usurpation that I have found is the view of the site PhD Tree.org, site that has the ambition ‘to document the academic family tree of PhDs worldwide, both past and present’, its self-declared goal being ‘to build the most comprehensive academic genealogy Wiki for every discipline’. Nevertheless, to my name ‘Dan Teodosiu’ there is a unique profile page which is affiliated with the Stanford University curriculum of the homonym but which enumerates on the publications tab not only his contributions (all of them published before year 2000), but also my own contributions (all of which have been published after year 2000), thus misleading through this form of IP theft to the view that alumni of the Stanford University are more active and proliferous than they are de facto when compared to others.
The above naturally raises the reasonable suspicion that the mentioned organisations and corporations overtly further the interest not only of their sponsors in their semantic engines and the public search results these disseminate, as recurrently reported, but also further the interest of their employees and alumni, thereby distorting the genuine view upon these persons to these ones benefit, by not taking automatically into account the possibility of confusion, imposture and usurpation propagated by and through their view and moreover not correcting it manually when requested to do so despite their self-proclaimed ‘semantical’ abilities, which thus prove to be unsupported by either own aptitudes or, even worse, own willingness.
All these considerations exhibit a certain dishonesty and pretentiousness on the part of the Information Technology (IT) industry, attitudes which are purposely adopted in order to forge its self-image through ever more intrusive and even aggressive publicity and show-offs meant to display their abilities, that mostly remain hidden to insiders like their sponsors and employees but lag much behind the most modest expectation when applied to the average user of their products.
Google and Facebook in particular misuse formal attributes like that of ‘semantic’ and formal notions like that of ‘graph’ in order to propagandize their gigantomanic ‘semantic graphs’ called ‘The Google Knowledge Graph’ and ‘The Facebook Social Graph’, both names being at the same time formal and blown-up in their senses when one compares the self-castrated semantic capabilities of their public interfaces with the self-improving semantic capabilities of a child’s exteriorizations, which represent - in order to cast it in the above criticised language - a ‘semantical engine’ that every fertile female can ‘produce’, ‘perfect’ and even ‘market’.
The semantics that the IT industry extracts out of the gigantic data that it collects and that it does not make available through publicly available interfaces and aps to the measure of the data’s internal employment, tremendously increase the leverage that the IT industry develops upon the average human in the world, by building and hiding ever more refined analytical models of their behaviour, thereby profiling (spying, simulating and addicting) their past, present and especially future behaviour.
The above described obsessive commercial profiling of users of most IT products has nowadays the effect of assailing these by design and marketing strategies which are ever more informed about the consumer’s behaviour, therefore representing an ever more dominating ‘Big Brother’ observing and ‘Invisible Hand’ controlling the average human, whether wilfully or incidentally.
The naďve attitude of making data about personal behaviour accessible to these big private and public entities (corporations, organizations, institutions, …) only worsens the general state of affairs and leads to a dangerous observability, controllability and eventual domination of all human activity in the world by the USA-led IT private and public interests.
The conclusion of the above analysis is that the present world is in bad need to develop goods and services that implement tactics and strategies empowering the end user to exert in turn observability and controllability onto the internal and external behaviour of these over-sized and -powered private and public entities and thereby enforce changes of attitude going as far as to institute a reverted control of the average human in the world onto these entities, thus developing a genuinely new form of international, global or mondial awareness and democracy, yet to be theorized and practiced, hopefully already in the present century.
© Dan TEODOSIU
27 June 2017