Business
DOJ Takes Aim at Breaking Up Google
News release from Reclaim The Net
|
On Tuesday, the United States announced potential plans to request a court mandate directing Alphabet Inc to divest significant segments of its operations, including its Chrome browser and Android operating system. This move aims to dismantle what is described as an illegal monopoly held by Google in the online search sector. A judge had previously concluded in August that Google, which handles 90% of internet searches in the US, had established this monopoly unlawfully.
We obtained a copy of the proposals for you here. The Justice Department has outlined remedies that could dramatically alter the landscape of how information is accessed on the internet by Americans, potentially diminishing Google’s revenue and enabling competitors to expand. These proposed remedies are designed to prevent Google’s historical dominance from expanding into emerging sectors like artificial intelligence. The department emphasized that effectively addressing the harm caused necessitates “not only ending Google’s control of distribution today but also ensuring Google cannot control the distribution of tomorrow.” Additionally, the Justice Department is considering urging the court to halt Google’s substantial payments to secure its search engine as the pre-installed or default option on new devices. In 2021, Google paid $26.3 billion to various companies, including Apple, to maintain its search engine as the default on devices, which has helped preserve its dominant market position.  Google, planning to appeal, described the proposals on a corporate blog as “radical” and “far beyond the specific legal issues in this case.” The company asserts that its search engine remains a top choice due to its quality and contends it faces significant competition from entities like Amazon. Google also noted that users have the freedom to select alternative search engines. The Justice Department’s efforts also include proposals to forestall Google’s control over future technology developments in AI. They may require Google to make its indexes, data, and models used for search and AI features accessible to competitors and proposes restrictions on Google’s agreements that could limit other AI firms’ access to web content. The department suggests allowing websites to opt out of having their content used by Google to train AI models. Google warned that these AI-focused proposals might inhibit the industry’s growth. The company argued, “There are enormous risks to the government putting its thumb on the scale of this vital industry — skewing investment, distorting incentives, hobbling emerging business models — all at precisely the moment that we need to encourage investment.” A detailed proposal from the Justice Department is expected to be submitted to the court by November 20, with Google set to present its counter-proposals by December 20. |
From the Fraser Institute
When federal Environment Minister Steven Guilbeault recently criticized Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre for hosting a fundraiser that included an oil company executive, he raised an interesting question. How should our politicians—of all parties—engage with Canada’s natural resource sector and the industry leaders that drive our natural resource economy?
Consider a recent report by the Chamber of Commerce, entitled Canada’s Natural Wealth, which notes that Canada’s natural resources sector contributed $464 billion to Canada’s economy (measured by real GDP) and supported 3 million jobs in 2023. That represented 21 per cent of the national economy and 15 per cent of employment.
Within the natural resources sector, mining, oil and gas, and pipeline transmission represent 45 per cent of all GDP impact from the sector. Oil and gas production accounted for $71 billion in GDP in 2023. If you throw in the support sector for oil and gas production, and for manufacturing petroleum and coal products, that number reaches nearly $100 billion in GDP.
Shouldn’t any responsible leader want to regularly consult with industry leaders in the natural resource sector to determine how they can facilitate expansion of the sector’s contribution to Canada’s economy?
The Chamber also notes that the natural resource sector is a massive contributor to Canada’s balance of trade, reporting that last year the “sector generated $377 billion in exports, accounting for nearly 50% of Canada’s merchandise exports, and a $228 billion trade surplus (that is, exports over imports) —critical for offsetting trade deficits (more imports than exports) in other sectors.”
Again, shouldn’t all government leaders want to work with industry leaders to promote even more natural resource trade and exports?
The natural resource sector also accounts for one out of every seven jobs in Canada’s economy, and the wages offered in the natural resource sector are higher than the national average—annual wages in the sector were $25,000 above the national average in 2023. And workers in the sector are about 2.5 times more productive, meaning they contribute more to the economy compared to workers in other industries.
One more time—shouldn’t all of Canada’s political leaders, regardless of political stripe, want to work with natural resource producers to create more high-paying jobs for more Canadians?
Finally, the Chamber of Commerce report suggests that some environmental policies require swift reform. Proliferating regulations have made investing in Canada a “riskier and more costly proposition.” The report notes that carbon pricing, Clean Fuel Regulations, proposed Clean Electricity Regulations, proposed federal emissions cap and proposed methane regulations all deter investment in Canada. Which means less economic opportunity for many Canadian workers.
With so much of Canada’s economic prosperity at stake, it’s not improper—as Guilbeault and others suggest—for any politician to meet with and seek political support from Canada’s natural resource industry leaders. Indeed, to not meet with and listen to these leaders would be an act of economic recklessness and constitute imprudent leadership of the worst kind.
Author:
A nuclear power plant
From the Daily Caller News Foundation
Google has made big news in the energy space over the past week, and all of it conflicts with the Harris-Biden goals of a glorious future powered entirely by windmills, solar arrays and presumably some combination of Unicorn fur and fairy dust.
Last week, the Washington Post ran a major story detailing the fact that Nebraska’s Omaha Public Power District (OPPD) will be forced to keep two coal-fired power generation units running for years longer than previously planned to accommodate the electricity needs of new data centers being built in the area by Google and Meta. Originally scheduled to be shuttered at the end of 2023, the units will now remain active through 2026, and local residents and activists expressed skepticism they will be shut down even then.
“A promise was made, and then they broke it,” the Post quotes local resident Cheryl Weston as saying. “The tech companies bear responsibility for this. The coal plant is still open because they need all this energy to grow.”
Well, yes, they do. Given the way supposed deadlines and promises related to this government-forced energy transition have been consistently extended and broken, Weston’s skepticism seems well-grounded.
By now, most everyone is aware of the enormous new demand the proliferation of data centers is placing on the U.S. regional power grids. The new demand from Big Tech is being added to an electric system already strained by huge demands from crypto mining, EV charging and general population growth and economic expansion.
This demand growth threatens to overwhelm the ability of power companies to build new electric generating capacity rapidly enough to keep up. This is especially true for companies operating in areas that restrict such new generating capacity to be “green,” i.e. intermittent wind and solar.
In the Washington Post’s story, the OPPD attributes the need to keep the coal units running on the slow development of anticipated new wind and solar capacity. But that avoids the reality that these data centers and other big power demand hogs require reliable generation, 24 hours a day, 7 days every week. The limitations of intermittent, weather-dependent wind and solar, even when combined with current backup battery tech, leaves companies like Google and Meta demanding more reliable, consistent generation.
This reality is not limited to the Omaha area. On Monday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Google and parent company Alphabet are also backing a new company engaged in the development of a new generation of modular nuclear reactors as a means of securing its future electricity supplies. In a deal with nuclear startup Kairos Power, Google commits to buying power from seven Kairos reactors when they go live in the coming years.
“The end goal here is 24/7, carbon-free energy,” Google/Alphabet senior director for energy and climate Michael Terrell said. “We feel like in order to meet goals around round-the-clock clean energy, you’re going to need to have technologies that complement wind and solar and lithium-ion storage.”
These developments involving Google and Meta come on the heels of other recent stories detailing efforts by tech giants to secure their future power needs. In early October, Constellation Energy announced it will reactivate its Three Mile Island nuclear plant in Pennsylvania to feed the power needs of nearby data centers under development by Microsoft. Constellation announced a similar deal in July to power data centers owned by Amazon from other nuclear facilities it operates.
The securing of their own power supplies could well become a requirement for big tech companies in some regions, as regulators and grid managers become increasingly concerned about their potential to drain regional grids of needed capacity to keep the lights on for everyone else. Bloomberg recently reported on comments by Thomas Gleeson, Chairman of the Public Utilities Commission of Texas, warning data center developers they should plan to provide at least part of their own power needs if they wish to connect to the grid in a timely fashion.
What it all means is that demand for reliable, 24/7 power supplied by nuclear, natural gas and even coal is going to continue rising for the foreseeable future. The glorious energy transition will just have to wait for reality.
David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.
San Antonio police chief to criminal Venezuelan gangs: ‘We’re coming for you’
Canadians largely ignore them and their funding bleeds their competition dry: How the CBC Spends its Public Funding
‘Do You Hear Yourself?’: JD Vance Stunned After Raddatz Minimizes Migrant Gang Takeover Of Apartment Complexes
Inside America’s Fastest-Growing Criminal Enterprise: Sex Trafficking
-
Alberta2 days agoAlberta piloting test to supply industry with fuel derived from worn-out tires
-
Censorship Industrial Complex2 days agoJudges to decide if Robert F. Kennedy Jr. can sue Biden administration for colluding with social media companies to censor free speech
-
Alberta2 days agoClean energy think tank says Alberta has the resources to lead Canada in carbon capture and storage
-
Alberta1 day agoSun setting on AHS as first of four provincial health agencies, Primary Care Alberta set to launch
-
Uncategorized2 days agoBreaking: Trudeau Admits Missing At Least Five Crucial Reports Or Memos Intended For Him to Authorize Defensive Briefs to MPs
-
National5 hours agoIrate parents demand answers from Saskatchewan school allowing males to use girls’ locker rooms
-
Health1 day agoThinking of taking a flu shot? Read this first…
-
Economy2 days agoFederal government’s recent fiscal record includes unprecedented levels of spending and debt