Google won't make AI for energy companies for oil and gas extraction

jfreund said:
God forbid we lessen the environmental impact of fossil fuel extraction.
Click to expand...
Would it though? It simply says it'd make it more efficient. Way back dumping mercury into the ground to extract gold was much more efficient than the traditional way, but was hardly lessening the environmental impact.

Also there's the other side of it, if they could more cheaply extract oil/gas then they'd sell said fossil fuels for cheaper which means the push to replace them with cleaner energy sources would also get squashed, so ultimately they might be helping the environment by making said extraction more difficult. I mean why do we use gas today? Because it's relatively energy dense on a volume basis AND a cost basis. If it cost $20/gallon to fill up your car more people would take mass transit or maybe drive electric vehicles.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Would it though? It simply says it'd make it more efficient. Way back dumping mercury into the ground to extract gold was much more efficient than the traditional way, but was hardly lessening the environmental impact.

Also there's the other side of it, if they could more cheaply extract oil/gas then they'd sell said fossil fuels for cheaper which means the push to replace them with cleaner energy sources would also get squashed, so ultimately they might be helping the environment by making said extraction more difficult. I mean why do we use gas today? Because it's relatively energy dense on a volume basis AND a cost basis. If it cost $20/gallon to fill up your car more people would take mass transit or maybe drive electric vehicles.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it though? We can both make up random hypotheticals or use examples like the gold/mercury one that aren't comparable.

Make a better electric car and people will buy it. The average person isn't in bed with the oil companies. In the meantime, people still need to get to work, and mass transit isn't the answer for the non-urban crowd.
 
Last edited:
Fossil fuel companies were a small portion of Google's business anyway.

Google's revenue from oil and gas was roughly $65 million, which accounted for less than 1 percent of Google Cloud's revenues in that same period and those revenues decreased by 11 percent when overall Cloud revenue grew 53 percent," the spokesperson added.
Click to expand...

Nice virtue-signaling, Google.

Didn't want your outsourced contractors anyways.
 
I guess they missed Moores "Planet of the Humans". Behind the curve on that one Google.

(Short version, fossil fuels saved the forests, idiot environmentalists want to replace the worlds power sources with "biofuels", basically wood chips from shit tonnes of fresh trees)
 
If you’re keeping score at home, Google will work with the Chinese government, who we know is currently running concentration camps to imprison a minority population and crush them into conformity or elimination, engage in live organ harvesting with a targeted Falun Gong religious minority, suppress civil rights and freedoms for regular citizens, and have increasingly been using their military to assert regional dominance, but making AI for oil and gas companies who extract the stuff that powers Google’s private jet for Pichai to travel in represents a moral hazard. Welcome to “being woke” in 2020, folks!
 
idiomatic said:
I guess they missed Moores "Planet of the Humans". Behind the curve on that one Google.

(Short version, fossil fuels saved the forests, idiot environmentalists want to replace the worlds power sources with "biofuels", basically wood chips from shit tonnes of fresh trees)
Click to expand...
thats probably why they are doing.
 
kirbyrj said:
Wouldn't it though? We can both make up random hypotheticals or use examples like the gold/mercury one that aren't comparable.
Click to expand...
I don't know if it would, the article in no way states how AI would help them. The person I originally replied to automatically assumed AI would make it the extraction more environmentally friendly, and the gold/mercury one is absolutely comparable because it's a situation where efficiency didn't mean environmentally friendly. Hey for all I (don't) know the AI could lead them to places to extract without spilling a drop of oil or harming a single fluffy bunny, but I'm not going to assume that it does just because "AI Assist"

Make a better electric car and people will buy it. The average person isn't in bed with the oil companies. In the meantime, people still need to get to work, and mass transit isn't the answer for the non-urban crowd.
Click to expand...
Make electric cars a cheaper alternative than gas and people will buy it you mean, and I agree. Which was kind of where I was going with it, if gas isn't so damn cheap people might look more into other options, and if Google helped oil companies more efficiently get oil than presumably gas would continue to be cheaper, or get even more so cheaper, which in the long run would not be as good for the environment regardless of how many fluffy bunnies are saved.
 
Pretty easy decision to make when your primary energy usage is electricity. You can claim carbon neutrality even when your grid power sources include coal and gas because some magic box sends only electrons to Google data centers that come from wind or solar sources. Ignore the whole calm night issue.
 
Google ain't the only shop in town for AI. Supply meet demand. Some one else will provide the software expertise.
 
so i guess the Oil industry will pay for their own AI engineers and data scientists to do this work like every other industry? k...
 
Meh, drilling aint that hard. I mean, sure, joe schmo off the street probably couldn't do it, but if you can read a map and do some math, you can drill. What makes it expensive is transport, environmental regulations, and refining...and you can't eliminate those, nor can they be much more efficient.
 
There are already companies doing this, it’s not a very competitive market and pretty specialized. I can understand why Google wouldn’t want to step into that ring.
 
So, Google maintains that it has the right to offer, or refuse, its services to any individual or entity it chooses. Based on whatever criteria it determines.

I wonder what their stance is on businesses that do the same, such as mens only clubs? Or refusing service to patrons whose pants are below their buttocks?

It seems that Google is being hypocritical.
 
Almost makes you wonder if Google's AI sucks at this, so signal go fweee!
 
c3k said:
So, Google maintains that it has the right to offer, or refuse, its services to any individual or entity it chooses. Based on whatever criteria it determines.

I wonder what their stance is on businesses that do the same, such as mens only clubs? Or refusing service to patrons whose pants are below their buttocks?

It seems that Google is being hypocritical.
Click to expand...
No its a PR stance, there are a half dozen AI firms that have been working in this field for a while IBM included, it is a specialized field that requires not only programmers but programmers and data analysts trained in the field who aren't cheap, you can't train an AI after all if you don't have any understanding of what you are teaching it, the good old Garbage in Garbage out rules apply. AI for Energy sectors would take them 5 or more years to break into and another 10 to catch up at an investment they would likely not make adequate returns on, where as it costs them nothing to make a statement about a product they aren't interested in.
 
Lakados said:
No its a PR stance, there are a half dozen AI firms that have been working in this field for a while IBM included, it is a specialized field that requires not only programmers but programmers and data analysts trained in the field who aren't cheap, you can't train an AI after all if you don't have any understanding of what you are teaching it, the good old Garbage in Garbage out rules apply. AI for Energy sectors would take them 5 or more years to break into and another 10 to catch up at an investment they would likely not make adequate returns on, where as it costs them nothing to make a statement about a product they aren't interested in.
Click to expand...
Token statements to make people think they care. If there was money in it and they would be doing it. As you said would take a few years to get into, by then electric is starting to gain traction. It's just something they don't feel it's worth getting into, so they play the we care card. Like mention d above, no issues bending to Chinese will or military contracts, but OMG fossil fuel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top