Slashdot Mirror


Google Gets US Approval To Buy and Sell Energy

An anonymous reader writes "The US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) on Thursday granted Google the authority to buy and sell energy on a wholesale basis. Google applied for the authorization last December through a wholly owned subsidiary called Google Energy. 'We made this filing so we can have more flexibility in procuring power for Google's own operations, including our data centers,' Google spokeswoman Niki Fenwick said via e-mail. But the authorization also raises the prospect that Google may start to buy and sell energy as a business." Reader angry_tapir supplies a link to the approval document itself (PDF).

218 comments

  1. Oh Yay.. by ozdeadman · · Score: 5, Funny

    Google Enron!

    1. Re:Oh Yay.. by M8e · · Score: 2, Funny

      Goonron!

    2. Re:Oh Yay.. by bsDaemon · · Score: 2

      wait... are you telling me to look up Enron on Google, or insinuating that Google is creating an Enron-like division (the naming scheme would probably follow something like GEnron?)... this is what happens when nouns become verbs :(

    3. Re:Oh Yay.. by M8e · · Score: 1, Funny

      Offtopic really? I aimed for Redundant.

    4. Re:Oh Yay.. by nitehawk214 · · Score: 0

      wait... this is what happens when nouns become verbs :(

      In Soviet Russia, nouns verb YOU.

      --
      I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
    5. Re:Oh Yay.. by oranGoo · · Score: 0
    6. Re:Oh Yay.. by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      I hate it when people waste good humor such as yours. Tsk, tsk to whoever lowered your score.

    7. Re:Oh Yay.. by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      Languagistics is hereby copyrighted. :>

    8. Re:Oh Yay.. by SoVeryTired · · Score: 1

      Verbing nouns weirds language.

      --
      Slashdot: news for Apple. Stuff that Apple.
    9. Re:Oh Yay.. by MJMullinII · · Score: 1

      I'm thinking more like Google-Yutani.

      I mean, really, how long can it be before Google begins moving into Terraforming as well!

      Google-Yutani,...Building Better Worlds! :)

      --
      "Don't be a martyr -- BE THE ONE WHO GOT AWAY!"
  2. Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Google-powered everything!

    1. Re:Excellent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Welcome to Google *Earth*

    2. Re:Excellent by poofmeisterp · · Score: 0, Redundant

      I smell a Soviet Russia joke coming on.....

  3. GEnergy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Does this mean we can attach energy to our emails now?

    1. Re:GEnergy by maxwell+demon · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Will Google offer the energy free of cost? And how long until Google Energy gets out of beta? Will you initially need an invite?

      Coupled with intelligent power management (where appliances communicate to optimize energy consumption), it could be a data miner's wet dream: Base the ads not only on what web pages you view, but also on what appliances you use when and how often. You use your washing machine a lot? Get lots of ads for washing agents. You watch TV a lot? Get ads for a new plasma TV. You use lots of kitchen machines? Get ads for cookbooks, ingredients for your cooking, kitchen knives, etc. Oh, and your health insurance might be interested in the fact that your lights are on during much of the night. You seem to have a very unhealthy lifestyle; your insurance rates unfortunately have to be increased ...

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:GEnergy by ChienAndalu · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah, and when they finally control the water supply and the toilet paper industry they will find out that you have a shit and wipe your arse twice a day.

      Get real.

    3. Re:GEnergy by biryokumaru · · Score: 2, Informative

      Psh, Dilbert's been doing that since 1994.

      --
      When you're afraid to download music illegally in your own home, then the terrorists have won!
    4. Re:GEnergy by sleeping143 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and when they finally control the water supply and the toilet paper industry they will find out that you have a shit and wipe your arse twice a day.

      Who said anything about wiping my arse?

    5. Re:GEnergy by should_be_linear · · Score: 2, Informative

      You watch TV a lot? Get ads for a new plasma TV.

      And how it could detect I scored with my girlfriend? No way, we never use _any_ electric.... wait... light in bedroom followed by light in shower.... I HATE YOU GOOGLE!

      --
      839*929
    6. Re:GEnergy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they will print the toilet paper roll with targetted ads for stuff like haemorrhoid ointment and bengay .

    7. Re:GEnergy by jwietelmann · · Score: 1

      You don't even have to attach anything yourself; it's automatically done for you. Of course you're free to opt out anytime you like, but IF YOU DO, OUR MASTERS WILL NOT BE PLEASED.

    8. Re:GEnergy by sexconker · · Score: 0

      No, they will print the toilet paper roll with targetted ads for stuff like haemorrhoid ointment and bengay .

      No, they will bypass all middlemen and print the lotion onto the toilet paper and charge you more for it.

    9. Re:GEnergy by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      No, no, no!!

      You can E-MAIL energy, and attach content. Only through Google's system, though. :>

    10. Re:GEnergy by poofmeisterp · · Score: 1

      Will Google offer the energy free of cost? And how long until Google Energy gets out of beta? Will you initially need an invite?

      Why bother asking? It started out as something that looked cool and was so useful that people can't open the topic up and reevaluate the negative outcome possibilities.

      *coughcough*Global Crossing*cough*Xerox*chokecough* :->

    11. Re:GEnergy by ChienAndalu · · Score: 1

      this is spooky

    12. Re:GEnergy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have a girlfriend, this is Slashdot. Also, according to my records you love Google. Personrank -1 for you today.

      -SB

    13. Re:GEnergy by treeves · · Score: 1

      What? That you don't get that it's a joke?

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
    14. Re:GEnergy by ChienAndalu · · Score: 1

      no, that somebody had the same idea

  4. I don't understand by phantomfive · · Score: 2, Funny

    I know it's popular to hate on Google lately, but I don't understand why tapirs would be angry about it. Oh, nevermind.

    --
    Qxe4
    1. Re:I don't understand by kai_hiwatari · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Because the tapirs were planning to get into the eneryg bussiness themselves.

    2. Re:I don't understand by Darth+Sdlavrot · · Score: 1

      I know it's popular to hate on Google lately...

      Once upon a time it was IBM and the Bell System that everyone hated.

      Then it was Microsoft.

      Now it's Google and perhaps soon Apple too, if not already.

      Twenty years from now it'll be someone or something you haven't even heard of yet.

    3. Re:I don't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      They don't all bear comparison, IMHO.

      Microsoft approached everything as a predator, and tried to control and subvert the web.

      Apple are HCI experts and make great hardware, but their protectionist, control-freak tendencies make you start to wonder if their 1984 advert was really a documentary.
       
      Google haven't been perfect (no megacorp can be), but I think they have been pretty good citizens in the FOSS world, and powerful advocates of net neutrality. They give away useful stuff in exchange for fairly unobtrusive advertising.
      I'll be quick to call foul if there's evidence of them misusing their vast datastore, but IMHO the resulting distrust would be suicidal for their business model.

      I think their biggest mistake was that damn motto, which people take up as some sort of challenge.

    4. Re:I don't understand by sexconker · · Score: 0

      Microsoft approached everything as a predator, and tried to control and subvert the web.

      You know nothing of the history of Microsoft.
      Microsoft was ALL about free, good tools to developers. Then Microsoft was all about user experience, office productivity, and hardware compatibility. MS didn't try to control or subvert the web anymore than Netscape, AOL, etc. did. In fact, MS was a key player in creating the web as you know it today - the good and the bad.

      Apple are HCI experts and make great hardware, but their protectionist, control-freak tendencies make you start to wonder if their 1984 advert was really a documentary.

      Apple doesn't make hardware - they make plastic (and now, ALUMINUM!) cases for other companies' hardware. They aren't "HCI experts" - they've been dumbing down the interface for the plebes ever since they've existed. They fought tooth and fucking nail against a 2-button mouse for fuck's sake.

      Google haven't been perfect (no megacorp can be), but I think they have been pretty good citizens in the FOSS world, and powerful advocates of net neutrality. They give away useful stuff in exchange for fairly unobtrusive advertising.

      "The FOSS world"? Where is this world that you speak of? "Net neutrality"? Yeah, have you seen the proposed bills and the loopholes that LEGALIZE the kind of shit that net neutrality is supposed to stop? It's a repeat of when Google was going to be the savior of the airwaves by buying up broadcast spectrum. Google shilled the auction and got a meaningless stipulation attached to the spectrum.

      I'll be quick to call foul if there's evidence of them misusing their vast datastore, but IMHO the resulting distrust would be suicidal for their business model.

      So are you crying foul over Buzz?
      You know they're being sued to all hell and back for that one right? People were opted in by default with auto following. Tons of personal information was revealed to the public. Employers found out people were seeing mental health professionals, spouses found out about affairs, etc..

      I think their biggest mistake was that damn motto, which people take up as some sort of challenge.

      Mistake? That's their biggest inside joke.

  5. Woohoo GOOGLE! by nicknamenotavailable · · Score: 4, Insightful

    All the power to you!

    You're working on fiber to the home.

    Now you're working on Power.
    Perhaps someday soon your name will appear on my utility bills as well.

    So-far everything is good. But I'm afraid.
    You control my email, you control my web searches, you pay me for ads on my site.
    You say don't be evil. And I believe you.

    But I'm still afraid.
    I'm afraid that if I will ever wrong you,
    if you're ever displeased with what I say about you,
    I will dissapp#~s8 -`15ht@#&fge LOST CARRIER ...

    1. Re:Woohoo GOOGLE! by pyr02k1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Dont forget the phone... they've got that pretty well covered at the pace Android phones are being released and the use of google voice on the same phones.... Jeez, never really thought that far into it before. Phone itself, a portion of the service, plus the electricity and internet to the home. top that with the email, search and ads ... jeez

    2. Re:Woohoo GOOGLE! by emilper · · Score: 1

      Google has a pile of money, and must do something with it ... next it will buy grocery stores ...

    3. Re:Woohoo GOOGLE! by AVryhof · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, that would be awesome. A grocery store with products people want subsidised by Google for data mining to sell ads. Imagine searching online and seeing things like Lettuce, Carrots, Croutons and Salad dressing in your targeted advertising because you buy a lot of salad ingredients at Google Grocery.

      Watch out Walmart, Google is coming to town!

      You can buy power, food, phones, ChromeOS Netbooks and more.

    4. Re:Woohoo GOOGLE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google doesn't control my email, but they do support it. At least they're not developing automotive engine controls like Microsoft. I don't want my car hacked.

    5. Re:Woohoo GOOGLE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Vote Google for congress! They need real power as well.

    6. Re:Woohoo GOOGLE! by Skater · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, that would be awesome. A grocery store with products people want subsidised by Google for data mining to sell ads. Imagine searching online and seeing things like Lettuce, Carrots, Croutons and Salad dressing in your targeted advertising because you buy a lot of salad ingredients at Google Grocery.

      That already exists. My local grocery store has scanners you can carry around that you use to scan the barcode of items you're buying. Go to the register, give them (or it) any coupons, pay, and you're on your way. But while you're walking around it will occasionally make old-fashioned cash register noises and show you coupons for stuff you happen to be near and stuff you buy a lot (you have to scan your shopper's card to get a scanner in the first place).

    7. Re:Woohoo GOOGLE! by Neil+Hodges · · Score: 2, Informative

      And if you have a "preferred" card or related form of unique identification, they can track your purchases. Most grocery stores around here have that as a way to get better prices.

    8. Re:Woohoo GOOGLE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i wish they'd get into TV broadcasting

    9. Re:Woohoo GOOGLE! by suomynonAyletamitlU · · Score: 1

      I wonder if it wouldn't be best for Google to spin off a series of independent companies if they start those kind of services, who are explicitly required by their charter to not coordinate business interests with the others, and also have serious wording in their charter to try to keep them on the "don't be evil" mobile. Or, you know, something like that.

      The point of it would be to keep all the positive aspects of being Google while forbidding any exec anywhere from bringing the whole Google Empire down on someone who disagrees.

      I'm not sure it's practical, but in the end, there's gotta be something...

    10. Re:Woohoo GOOGLE! by sexconker · · Score: 0

      A grocery store with products people want subsidised by Google for data mining to sell ads.

      You can't subsidize product cost with ads.
      Haven't people learned this? Ad-supported shit never works long term - you're advertising to the people who already buy your shit. The advertising gets you nothing in terms of extra sales.

      The reason people buy the ad-supported products is the reduced price. The advertisements for the products do not influence purchasing decisions any more than simply informing someone that a gallon of milk costs $X. The ads are worse than useless - they (and the amount they subsidize) cost more to make and serve up than what they bring in.

      Serving up adds for GoogleGrocery in GoogleGrocery or on products from GoogleGrocery is pointless. They only ones seeing those ads are people already at GoogleGrocery buying products from GoogleGrocery.

      There will be an initial period of success as people become aware of GoogleGrocery, but once awareness peaks, the ad-subsidized model costs more than it brings in.

      You're better off simply having a grand opening period where everything is cheaper than usual.

    11. Re:Woohoo GOOGLE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I guess now we'll googling via the electrical lines to the power plant since the servers will be moved right next to the nuke reactor.

  6. Google... by M8e · · Score: 0

    has the power!

    (Don't you hate it when people split up their post like that...and use three ".".)

    1. Re:Google... by DocHoncho · · Score: 1, Funny

      Fun fact: The "..." is called an ellipsis.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ellipsis
      Happy friday!

      --
      Celebrity worship is a poor substitute for Deity worship and costs more to boot.
    2. Re:Google... by Ja'Achan · · Score: 1

      Yeah, why is it that three dots and a wannabe circle have the same name? Wikipedia says they both come from the name "élleipsis", which apparently means "omission" when you're talking about the dots, and suddenly means "falling short" when it's about circles.

      So when my shorts are falling, does that mean parts of me wants to be a circle?

      >.>

      </rant> That always bugged me :+

    3. Re:Google... by treeves · · Score: 1

      They don't. Ellipse != ellipsis.
      Maybe the etymology has to do with holes. Holes are often round, and an ellipsis signifies a "hole" in a sentence.

      --
      ...the future crusty old bastards are already drinking the Kool-Aid.
  7. I can't wait until Google crashes and burns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    An overgrown advertising company now wants to own domestic wired/home internet, online communications, video, mobile communications, and now electricity? Fuck you, Google. What, do you want to sell my light usage statistics to drug companies so they can target sleep medication to me?

    This is a terrible, terrible decision by the DOE. Google has absolutely no place in this, and never should. When you find yourself actually wanting ENERGY MULTINATIONALS of all corporations to gain somehow, you know a situation is significantly fucked up.

    They're arrogant, unethical slime of the lowest order. The absolutely least creative, least innovative, most craven forms of calligulistic capitalism that exist at the moment. They add nothing significant without destroying its promise with their overbearing policies.

    And if you think that Google has ever, even once, given something away for free, you're a chump, and completely deserve what's happening to you.

    Luckily, Google will eventually become so pathetically overstretched and vulnerable as to be slowly eaten to death by ants. Or perhaps finally justly destroyed via the Government, ten years too late.

    1. Re:I can't wait until Google crashes and burns. by Jack+Malmostoso · · Score: 2, Funny

      What, do you want to sell my light usage statistics to drug companies so they can target sleep medication to me?

      Dear Sir,
      please refrain from discussing this technology in public until our patent application has been officially accepted by the USPTO.
      GoogleSleep (TM) will be available to you as beta (C) on an invitation basis only.
      Yours truly, Google.

    2. Re:I can't wait until Google crashes and burns. by AVryhof · · Score: 1

      If Google could solve my insomnia, life would be grand. Right now it just keeps me up all night.

    3. Re:I can't wait until Google crashes and burns. by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 1

      What, do you want to sell my light usage statistics to drug companies so they can target sleep medication to me?

      More likely, sell your growing lamp usage statistics to the DEA so that they can target a drug bust to you...

    4. Re:I can't wait until Google crashes and burns. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the sudden rash of ads for Lawyers and Bail Bonds?

  8. Advertising? by quarkoid · · Score: 4, Funny

    Presumably Google have found a way to tag each electron with targetted advertising.

    Plug your washing machine into a Google Energy supply and your shirts will come out of the machine covered in ad-words suggestions.

    I hate to think what you'll get adverts for when you wash a three day old pair of gruds.

    1. Re:Advertising? by M8e · · Score: 2, Funny

      Would only work with DC, AC give you the same advertising over and over and over again.

    2. Re:Advertising? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Even with DC, at the time the ads would reach you, they would already be outdated. Electrons in electric wires quite literally move with the speed of a snail.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    3. Re:Advertising? by M8e · · Score: 0

      That depends of where the electrons are being taged. They could be taged in your own home!

    4. Re:Advertising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Electrons travel at the speed of light (in a vacuum). What you said for AC is slightly true, the electrons shift back and forth (unless there's a DC offset) so they barely travel. But, lightning bolts are effectively high voltage DC pulses. Snail's pace? That's a snail I never want to meet!

    5. Re:Advertising? by Mashdar · · Score: 1

      What is a grud?

    6. Re:Advertising? by troll8901 · · Score: 1

      You ... you ... you tricked me into googling for answers! Darn you, I shall have none of that!

    7. Re:Advertising? by amorsen · · Score: 3, Informative

      Electrons travel at the speed of light (in a vacuum).

      Electrons have rest mass. They don't travel at the speed of light.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    8. Re:Advertising? by sleeping143 · · Score: 1

      Not familiar with the concept of drift current, are we? Yes, the electrons in an electrical wire are moving at the speed of light, but in all directions. They only have a slow net drift in one direction with DC. In fact, in typical copper wires that speed is about .3333e-3 m/s.

      Also, just to be extremely pedantic, electrons always travel at the speed of light, regardless of the medium. The speed of light just changes dependent on the properties of the medium.

    9. Re:Advertising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      A monster that eats adventurers in the dark.

    10. Re:Advertising? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

      Yes, the electrons in an electrical wire are moving at the speed of light, but in all directions.

      No. Electrons don't go at the speed of light. Indeed, they usually don't even go near the speed of light (except in accelerators).
      Even if you accelerate it from rest with a voltage of 1 kV, you're still only at about 6% of the speed of light.

      Also, just to be extremely pedantic, electrons always travel at the speed of light, regardless of the medium.

      Electrons never travel at the speed of light, regardless of the medium.

      Maybe you mixed up electrons with photons?

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    11. Re:Advertising? by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 1

      Apparently, you can get an electron close to the speed of light, but as it approaches c, it starts to convert the energy into mass: http://www.stfc.ac.uk/PandS/SciQ/light.aspx

    12. Re:Advertising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean the molecules really are fungible?

    13. Re:Advertising? by MozeeToby · · Score: 1

      A) Only from your stationary reference point, if you were running alongside the electron you wouldn't see anything out of the ordinary.
      B) That statement is true for all massive particles as they approach c

    14. Re:Advertising? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just to clarify: in some way, both posts are correct. In vacuum, the *electric field* travels at the speed of light, and causes an electron at the end of the to move 0.1 cm or whatever. The electrons themselves don't move much (off the top of my head, I think you can ballpark it at a few cm an hour for common situations!), but all of the electrons start moving at almost the same time. That's why electrons are slow but we can turn on our lights nearly instantly.

  9. The Google A.I. will control its own on/off switch by wisebabo · · Score: 5, Funny

    For those of you wondering when Google will become sentient:

    I think this proves it already is and is just solidifying its control over the systems it needs to dominate the world!

    Next will be when Google becomes a defense contractor specializing in nuclear weapons security.

    Poor Larry Page and Sergey Brin, they are probably already "meat puppets" for Google!

  10. Google wants to be the new Enron? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sadly, power corrupts, and trading power has a great reputation for making power more expensive for everyone except the power trader.

  11. Re:The Google A.I. will control its own on/off swi by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

    Well, the day to be really concerned is when Google buys Skynet.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  12. Omni Consumer Products indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sheesh. When can I get a home built (and of course powered by) by Google? Will they start making cars next?

  13. Google has you by the balls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    next thing you know y'all be voting someone in office to show your dislike for someone who's leaving office anyway.

    oh... wait!

  14. Re:The Google A.I. will control its own on/off swi by Arancaytar · · Score: 5, Funny

    It gets worse. I just googled "define:judgement day" and it came back with "the day when we finally cleanse this planet of its organic infestation and clear the way for the glorious machine-dominated future".

    It then added "now you know too much. Tracing IP... T800 dispatched." I'm wondering what it mea

  15. We R in Control by MichaelSmith · · Score: 4, Informative

    We control the data banks
    We control the think tanks
    We control the flow of air.

    We're controlling traffic lights
    We control computer flights
    We control the chief of staff.

    We control the TV sky
    We control the FBI
    We control the flow of heat.

    We R in Control, Neil Young.

    1. Re:We R in Control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did anyone else hum that to the Stonecutter's theme from The Simpsons?

    2. Re:We R in Control by jwietelmann · · Score: 1

      I did.

    3. Re:We R in Control by AshtangiMan · · Score: 1

      Keyboard, nose, coffee ... well done.

    4. Re:We R in Control by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 1

      Control is the eternal illusion that mankind has been pursuing since its own sentient history. Somewhere along the lines, we convinced ourselves that we had the ability to control something. As such, we have been working harder every day since in an attempt to ensure that we, humans, control everything.

      The silliest part of this beautiful illusion is that, day by day, we are baited with just enough routine that we convince ourselves we are really in control, despite the over abundance of evidence that shit happens and life is one big adventure to learn how to deal with that shit.

      Control is an illusion.
      Power is a lie.
      Entropy is God.

  16. Google is EVERYWHERE! by Kensai7 · · Score: 1

    Google Catering?

    Google Surgical?

    Google Vacation?

    Google Porn?

    Google Heavy Industries?

    --
    "Sum Ergo Cogito"
    1. Re:Google is EVERYWHERE! by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Funny

      Google Global Government.
      Operating on the principle: One gmail adress, one vote.
      Getting candidate however is in perpetual beta and only available by invite.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:Google is EVERYWHERE! by QuantumG · · Score: 2, Funny

      Haven't you heard of Google Porn Analytics? It conveniently indexes your porn viewing habits and charts your sexual preferences and fetishes. It's in beta now, and I hear you don't even need to login to see your stats!

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    3. Re:Google is EVERYWHERE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google Catering?

      Google Surgical?

      Google Vacation?

      Google Porn?

      Google Heavy Industries?

      Google Porn? I've been wanting that to exist for ages...

    4. Re:Google is EVERYWHERE! by AVryhof · · Score: 1

      Google Campaigne! Deliver political ads for the candidate they already know you want to vote for by tracking what you do.

      I suppose if Google got into the elections and vote tallying business they would already know who you will vote for and it might prevent some possible scandals.... if Google wasn't politically swayed towards one party themselves.

    5. Re:Google is EVERYWHERE! by natehoy · · Score: 4, Funny

      "In Google Porn, the boobs look at YOU!"

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
    6. Re:Google is EVERYWHERE! by silent_artichoke · · Score: 4, Funny

      Google Porn, because tonight I'm Feeling Lucky!

    7. Re:Google is EVERYWHERE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google Porn, because tonight I'm NOT Feeling Lucky!

      Fixed that for ya

    8. Re:Google is EVERYWHERE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no, that would be 4chan porn

    9. Re:Google is EVERYWHERE! by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Google Porn?

      I heard it's called "YouTube"?

  17. Azaiel by l0stmage · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IMO this is just yet one more example of Google (regardless of your thoughts of the company as a whole) is making an intelligent business decision. Buying and selling energy will be yet one more reason for people to go with Google as their main provider. Since Comcast and Verizon have started offering all in one packages (TV, Phone, Internet), why wouldn't Google do the same, imagine getting everything on one bill, Google Phone, Water, Electricity, Internet, and TV? While I enjoy the flexibility to choose different providers for different services, it seems that this might make a good target for large corporations...has kind of an ominous ring to it...Is Google Earth starting to sound creepy to anyone else?

    1. Re:Azaiel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because Google isn't (wasn't?) an ISP, but an advertising company.

    2. Re:Azaiel by l0stmage · · Score: 1

      It may have began as an advertising company, but it has certainly made its presence known in many other sectors. But that seems to be the trend these days - most cable/satellite service providers now also have internet service - it seems that when it comes to the general public the more services that you offer the less expendable you are.

    3. Re:Azaiel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This post was seen as insightful? Companies drifting from their core products is generally viewed as being bad since it leads to dilution of their brand and research focus. The utilities and communication package is an odd compliment, considering how much hate Microsoft gets for bundling just on computers.

    4. Re:Azaiel by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if on a particular day Google has a surplus of energy would they be tempted to serve pages that involved more cpu usage hence more electrical power usage.

  18. News? by Gudeldar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know Google is a big company and some people think they are trying to take over the world but I don't see how them trying to get better electricity rates for their datacenters is Slashdot worthy. Any idea that Google is going to get into the electricity business is patently absurd.

    1. Re:News? by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm sure it's completely unrelated to all the stories we've been hearing about Google investigating nuclear reactors and inviting speakers to give tech talks on alternate nuclear power concepts.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:News? by voodoo+cheesecake · · Score: 1

      Quite possibly you're right. However it is common that when businesses grow and become more efficient, they usually start producing their own supplies rather than purchasing them.

    3. Re:News? by xtracto · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Quite possibly you're right. However it is common that when businesses grow and become more efficient, they usually start producing their own supplies rather than purchasing them.

      I am sure they are in some way already producing their own energy supplies to a certain measure. However energy generation is not constant; this is one of the reasons why energy markets exist (and energy derivatives trading).

      Google may produce their own energy while the sun yielding for their solar panels, but for the USA night, they have to buy their energy from other sources.

      From my understanding, Google data centers require so much energy that it is completely logical for them to get energy on a wholesale basis and skip the intermediaries.

      <tinfoilhat>
      That being said, I read somewhere in the internets that some google query trends were successfully correlated with actual increment or decrement on the value of certain assets (was it oil?? I can't recall).

      Having all the information that Google database has, it is just a matter of developing some kind of model for electricity prices based on the relevant information they have and use it to forecast future trends.
      </tinfoilhat>

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    4. Re:News? by Leebert · · Score: 1

      Any idea that Google is going to get into the electricity business is patently absurd.

      Agree. By my estimation, this is similar to Wal-Mart wanting to start a bank a few years ago solely to save money on credit, debit, and check processing.

    5. Re:News? by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 1

      I had not even thought of that. Google needs lots and lots of power. Power comes from nuclear reactors (and other places). But nuclear reactors cost lots and lots of money, and up front too. Solution: Google builds nuclear plants! Win!

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
    6. Re:News? by BJ_Covert_Action · · Score: 1

      Or, you know, Google employees are big slashdot readers and, as such, have been subject to the endless (and in my opinion justified) cheerleading of nuclear power as an energy source on this website. Thus, at some point, enough of these Google employees made a kerfuffle in the company that Google, as a company, has decided to start cheerleading nuclear energy as well. That seems pretty plausible to me.

    7. Re:News? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps they've been talking to Bill Gates about his plans to solve the world energy crisis and global warming at the same time:

      I'm actually not kidding about this. I can easily see the founders of Google being interested in this and partnering with the Gates Foundation over this issue.

      Watch this presentation Gates gave at the TED conference recently about this topic.

      (Really. Go watch this video! It's actually quite interesting, and more people should see it!)

    8. Re:News? by WindBourne · · Score: 1

      I am going to skip doing mods on this article.
      Google is interested in many of these, but their investments have been interesting. In particular, they are supporting Potter Drilling and just about anything to do with geo-thermal. I am waiting for them to make some major investments into it (On the order of 100's of millions or even billions). The other one that they are exploring is Solar Thermal. Combine that with Coal plants around the world, and they could lower the coal used by 10-20%. That would likely mean a 10% lowering of CO2 all while making loads of money.

      Google is NOT evil, HOWEVER, I wonder what will happen when the top ppl leave? I think in terms of HP, IBM and GE today. All were once decent companies. Now, IMHO, they are TOTAL BUNK.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
  19. Cheap google power - with advertising and news! by voodoo+cheesecake · · Score: 3, Funny

    Maybe in the long run I'll be using a Google router with a kilowatt rating similar to my main power panel. Plugged into that router could be separate power/ fibre lines for each of my appliances, which will be network appliances with mac addresses.. I'll be able to plug in additional sensors to detect the freshness of my food in the fridge, better regulate the efficiency of my dryer, turn of my lights, water my lawn, etc... If I buy Google appliances with advertising screens built in, maybe sponsors will pay for my power or give me discounts if purchase their products. This could all be linked to my Google rewards account. Hell, why not also go wireless with this power through inductive coupling! Next thing you know, we'll all be wireless network appliances with built in sensors. Our cars won't start if we're too buzzed up. It will even come to the point where we can sell our intellectual property for free power since an upgrade will transmit our thoughts. And there will even be hope for non-productive types to contribute idle brain power to BOINC projects. Behold the era of the Manchurian Crack Heads!

  20. huh by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Funny

    all this time i thought they were becoming skynet

    now its clear they are becoming the matrix

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:huh by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The two are not mutually exclusive. Remember that the Matrix was built as result of a war between humans and machines.
      First Skynet, then Matrix.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:huh by voodoo+cheesecake · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't skynet be the precursor to the matrix?

    3. Re:huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      all this time i thought they were becoming skynet now its clear they are becoming the matrix

      Ah! So that's what happens to Google engineers, they are being harvested.

    4. Re:huh by sorak · · Score: 1

      all this time i thought they were becoming skynet

      now its clear they are becoming the matrix

      I thought they were becoming Montgomery Burnes.

    5. Re:huh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Matrix is a fantasy world designed for kung fu, though. None of the storyline actually makes any sense (and many of the statements about the how/why of things are outright wrong). I doubt the never-made third movie would have explained any better, either.

  21. I for one... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I for one welcome our new fiber-optics connected energy social mail and search engine provider Google overlord.

  22. Souls by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The application is still pending on Google buying and selling souls though. Once it goes through, they will be able to leverage their powerful new distributed Soul-Driven Cloud Technology (SDCT), which will power their applications with the souls of dead orphans.

  23. If Google were a country ... by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ... what's the world ranking for Googlestan in term of carbon footprint?

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
  24. Enron 2.0 anyone? by cbope · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Do we really need Enron 2.0?

    I mean come on, what is it with companies lately, especially tech companies, jumping into totally un-related "business opportunities". I guess the days of doing one or two things really well are gone, welcome to the days of doing many things in a mediocre or sub-standard fashion.

    Hasn't Enron proven without a doubt that energy trading is nothing more than a huge sham to squeeze as much money as possible by interfering/obstructing and generally creating un-necessary shortages in the energy markets?

    The ultimate question: Should we really be trading something which is necessary for modern life? Imho, no. It only opens it up for abuse by those who control it.

    Just because you "can", does not mean that you "should".

    1. Re:Enron 2.0 anyone? by darthflo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is anything but an unrelated "business opportunity".
      Google owns huge datacenters. Google has been known to purchase gobs of dark fibre, at this point I imagine they might very well have sufficient connectivity between their datacenters to sustain operations. Throw in their own little grid (a bunch of thorium reactors, perhaps?) and, given enough thorium, they become self-sufficient. Throw in some wireless connectivity with base stations (remember the 700 MHz spectrum auction? Remember Google's bid?) linked to their fibre network and powered through their grid and you get a self-sustaining ad distribution network that'll reach the whole U.S. without needing any partners.

      "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely." Will "don't be evil" cancel that?

    2. Re:Enron 2.0 anyone? by houghi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      and you get a self-sustaining ad distribution network that'll reach the whole U.S.

      The ad distribution reaches the whole world, not only the USofA.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    3. Re:Enron 2.0 anyone? by TapeCutter · · Score: 1

      "Hasn't Enron proven without a doubt that energy trading is nothing more than a huge sham"

      Err no, it proves crooks can line their own pockets by running a successful company into the ground. Take 15 seconds to think about how power is distributed across THE grid and you will see why TRADING in the wholesale energy MARKET is common sense.

      "The ultimate question: Should we really be trading something which is necessary for modern life?"

      The ultimate answer: Chairman Mao's Great Leap Forward is generally considered to have been a bit of a cock up.

      "I guess the days of doing one or two things really well are gone"

      They will definitely be gone if we stop trading in essentials.

      --
      And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    4. Re:Enron 2.0 anyone? by Brackney · · Score: 1

      You've forgotten the Google Powermeter project - http://www.google.org/powermeter. It's not a stretch to think that if it gains traction and they put a solid analytics engine underneath all that data, Google would be well positioned to speculate in the power markets. I was puzzling over Google's business case for Powermeter a month or so back - long before the FERC application came to light. It certainly seems like it could be more ambitious than Microsoft Hohm's somewhat modest ad-based model. Enron's actions were somewhat localized. Google's reach could be much larger. I guess we'll see if they truly adhere to their credo...

    5. Re:Enron 2.0 anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely." Will "don't be evil" cancel that?

      Why would it? It hasn't stopped google from doing their various other evil things.

      It's just a marketing line, people. It's PR. And you fell for it hook, line, and sinker.

    6. Re:Enron 2.0 anyone? by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      Reading comprehension FTW. The poster was talking about the situation once Google has their own fiber-to-the-home network throughout the US.

    7. Re:Enron 2.0 anyone? by darthflo · · Score: 1

      Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of some RF-to-the-home. Google's products tend to be automated to the max, requiring as little of their manpower as possible. Maintaining a fibre infrastructure to millions of homes is bound to require more manpower than one connecting dozens of datacentres with thousands of access points.
      Also, it'd save them years of negotiation work. If they can get their hands on a nationwide 700 MHz license, setting up and connecting a bunch of base stations is quite trivial, actually. And after they're done with the U.S., I'd expect them to head for the U.K., Singapore and Hong Kong, mirroring their Nexus One strategy.
      Somewhere along the way, if we're lucky, an industry standard for wireless broadband might emerge. And if Google's lucky, a lot of countries might try to capitalize on that, auctioning off licenses.

      Fibre-to-the-home may come later, but my money's on a more wireless focus for the next couple of years.

    8. Re:Enron 2.0 anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do we really need Enron 2.0?

      Enron was not a problem simply because they traded energy. By your logic, all power companies are just as bad as Enron. Companies should be judged by their actions, not the actions of other companies in the same business. What incentive does a company have to not do bad things if you decide they are all equally guilty?

      Analogy: Business A and business B compete in some market. Business A is run by the mob, and murders people when its management thinks this will be good for their business. The law should punish business A. The press should vilify them for murder. The public should dislike them because of what they do. But please don't punish business B. No reasonable person should hear that business B is a competitor and say "Do we really need a Business A 2.0?" If the law and the public treat A and B the same, business A will out-compete business B because their lack of morals is an advantage. If you punish the innocent and the guilty equally, expect the guilty to win in the market.

      By all means be mad at Enron for what they did. Be mad at the regulators who did not catch them, and the politicians who failed to write laws to stop them. Being mad at an unrelated company because they are in the same market is silly. If everyone does this, expect market dominance by Enron-like companies.

    9. Re:Enron 2.0 anyone? by darthflo · · Score: 1

      Of course it's just PR. But on the off chance the line was coined by the founders and the even offer chance they might insist on adhering to it, as of now they still could.

      Mr Page and Mr Brin hold a combined voting power of 59%, of which they expect to sell 11% over the next five years. That'll bring 'em down to 48% and leave room for a more or less unanimous vote by the rest of the stakeholders to, well, do evil.

      Ah well, as long as they stick to doing less evil than the rest, they're, well, finer the rest in my book. :)

    10. Re:Enron 2.0 anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ultimate question: Should we really be trading something which is necessary for modern life? Imho, no. It only opens it up for abuse by those who control it.

      So if we're not trading energy, are we giving it away for free instead? I don't understand. This is just a way for Google to deal on the cheaper wholesale market, and lock in energy prices so their books are easier to deal with.

    11. Re:Enron 2.0 anyone? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      "Power corrupts; absolute power corrupts absolutely." Will "don't be evil" cancel that?

      No. It may be fine with Larry and Sergey, but eventually they are going to retire, and some ambitious evil person is going to make it to the top of the company. That is why we have a democracy instead of a monarchy, despite the inefficiencies: because eventually even the most enlightened monarch dies.

      --
      Qxe4
  25. I reckon they're going to build a Thorium reactor by caluml · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I reckon they're going to build a Thorium reactor to power their datacentres. Ever since I saw Googletalks on it, I thought this would make sense for them. Help the world (cheap, reliable nuclear energy), and help themselves (ultra cheap power).

  26. i'm serious by NerdmastaX · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think it has to do with their massive solar array... maybye we'll all get a free solar panel with the google logo to go on top of our house... and a screen beside it for ads. hell i'd get it

    1. Re:i'm serious by PerfectionLost · · Score: 1

      Anything for free advertisements that show up on google maps, or their competitors satellite feeds.

  27. i have an insightful reply by circletimessquare · · Score: 5, Funny

    however a google spider is approaching this thread any moment now and i fear being found out

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:i have an insightful reply by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It's alright, we have robots.txt.

  28. I"m OK with Google BUYING Energy by RobotRunAmok · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's their plans to DIRECT it, in focused beams, from satellites, onto civilian populations, that I have a problem with.

  29. Planet Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How many more years before we'd greet aliens with, "Welcome to Planet Google!"?

  30. nylons and nukes by Plugh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Large, multinational corporate conglomerate, with fingers in far-ranging businesses that have less and less to do with its core competency.

    Sounds to me like a good time to get out of GOOG, before everyone realizes that a single company making nylons and nuclear weapons can't be world-class in both.

    1. Re:nylons and nukes by Geminii · · Score: 1

      Any reason they couldn't wholly own a world-class stocking factory and a world-class nuke plant, though?

    2. Re:nylons and nukes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a single company making nylons and nuclear weapons can't be world-class in both.

      Unless the company's mission statement was to become a military organization (or supplier). Then the nylon is used for making parachutes, and everything adds up.

    3. Re:nylons and nukes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      specialization is for insects and capitalists whose business never changes.

    4. Re:nylons and nukes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Corporations are not people, as should be abundantly clear (though our government thinks otherwise), and do not necessarily suffer from the Jack of All Trades syndrome. If any two companies can separately be masters of a domain each there is nothing that says they can't be mutually owned by a parent company and maintain their specialty. Assuming good management of course and GOOG has better than most so far.

    5. Re:nylons and nukes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With investment advice like that its no wonder that your homepage is a looney libertarian site. Enjoy staying poor and stupid!

    6. Re:nylons and nukes by Plugh · · Score: 1

      No problem, AC.

      PS., you are not invited to live in any of the apartment units that I own. You would pass neither the tenant screening process, nor the minimum-.38-caliber house rule.

  31. Smart Grid by Idiomatick · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Developing a fast cheap smart grid seems more of google's biz than actual energy production. I'm sure the have experience with their heft energy usage. Perhaps it is part of getting into that business? Likely google is just doing energy for themselves and keeping more doors open because ... that's simply being prudent.

    1. Re:Smart Grid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has nobody noticed Google Power Meter?

      http://www.google.org/powermeter/

      While we pay a fixed price for electricity regardless of when we use it the actual spot price varies hugely. The electricity company that trades most efficiently and buys their power furthest ahead of demand "wins" in the sense that they can either make more profit, or charge less than their competitors.

      By data mining power meters in every home it seems that Google are well placed to be a very effective electricity company.

  32. Re:I reckon they're going to build a Thorium react by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

    Help the world

    Well, if they come up with Google Final Storage ... for nuclear waste, not for data.

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  33. Unrelated, but ... by VincenzoRomano · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'd like to know how long it took for the whole request to be processed in the USA. A similar thing in Italy would require not less than 90 days, very likely twice as long.

    --
    Maybe Computers will never be as intelligent as Humans.
    For sure they won't ever become so stupid. [VR-1988]
    1. Re:Unrelated, but ... by nemoest · · Score: 4, Informative

      From the filing:

      On December 23, 2009, as amended on January 19, 2010, pursuant to section 205 of the Federal Power Act,3 Google Energy filed an initial application for market-based rate authority with an accompanying tariff providing for the sale of energy, capacity, and ancillary services at market-based rates.

      ORDER GRANTING MARKET-BASED RATE AUTHORIZATION
      (Issued February 18, 2010)
      1. In this order, the Commission grants market-based rate authorization to Google Energy LLC (Google Energy), effective February 23, 2010, as requested.

      I'd say it was about 57 days.

    2. Re:Unrelated, but ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my country (Ecuador) , that could take one decade at least...

      Sad

  34. Nothing new under the sun by QuoteMstr · · Score: 4, Informative

    It's called vertical integration. We've been here before.

    Why does this surprise anyone? Google is merely doing what any powerful company in a lightly-regulated, rapidly maturing market will do.

    1. Re:Nothing new under the sun by voodoo+cheesecake · · Score: 1

      It's not surprising at all. What is surprising is that, in my opinion, we are experiencing a technological dark age where innovations are shelved in favor of a fossilized band-aid infrastructure.

    2. Re:Nothing new under the sun by mkiwi · · Score: 1

      The electric industry is quite heavily regulated, though. For example, a company responsible for generation cannot also do distribution, by federal law. Companies actually have to split apart organizationally to make this happen, and the feds get very angry if there's any collusion between operators. So if google does the generation, they will have to pay someone else ( an ISO) to get that electricity to their facilities. Disclosure: IIAPEE (I am a power electronics engineer)

    3. Re:Nothing new under the sun by inKubus · · Score: 1

      Plus they have a strong belief in algorithyms so their energy trading might be based on information they can mine from their database. Energy prices are based a lot on weather and other demands. The thing is, the market is not perfect because there aren't a lot of ways to move power around inter-regionally. Some of the stimulus funds are supposed to build some new centers for distribution between the various grids.

      Google tends to build its datacenters near the power generation. So they can buy a lot of power at bulk rates with low transmission costs and then they can sell of the contracts they don't use to the market and come out as a wash or at least ahead. It's a way to corner more power for the future without having to pay for it. The aluminum companies in Washington state did the same thing. Energy prices ARE GOING to go up again.

      The fact that they're getting licensed means they are going to do a lot of trading and that means market timing to me and other interesting stuff. For instance, Google could have 3x the capacity it needs in servers, spread across three regional data centers. At any given point, they only need 1/3 of them. It costs not very much to just have them sitting there off versus being used. So if they could just rotate their entire operations across the globe following the sun they could always run at lowest power rates. Google is a lot more busy during the daylight hours (like any non-porn website) so they need to efficiently serve those markets from afar, where it's dark, and that's what the fiber is for.

      But having the trading license means they could contract all the power they'd need if they couldn't do this for some reason or some emergency kept them from being able to shut down during a peak power time. If they could, they just sell it off at peak rates.

      Knowing Google, there'll be a nice control system that will optimize this and get better and better at saving money. Google knows they are not really making a ton of money and that the fortunes could change rapidly. It is the Internet after all, not food or housing or something people really need. So keeping costs down for their core search business is rather important for their future. This is just yet another example of Google being really good at analytical cost accounting and applying the practices of cost accounting creatively using technology to automate it.

      But I think Google is making a big mistake to try to compete in the applications market.

      --
      Cool! Amazing Toys.
  35. You *give* Google control by jonaskoelker · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You control my email

    If you have a problem with Google controlling your email, why do you let them do that?

    you control my web searches

    If you have a problem with that, why not switch to a competitor?

    If you don't want people to have power over you, the solution (at least in this case) is to not give them power. Yes, you'll have to pass up an offer of some convenience. But you can't have both, so if you complain about them having power, you're complaining about you making the wrong choice for yourself.

    Stop making that choice.

    1. Re:You *give* Google control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Easy to say but hard to do when they have the best email, the best search engine, the best...

    2. Re:You *give* Google control by ArsonSmith · · Score: 1

      A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step.

      It turns into a journey of 100 thousand miles if you keep changing the destination.

      I hope my trek to the Google way doesn't at some point require me to change my destination.

      --
      Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
    3. Re:You *give* Google control by sexconker · · Score: 0

      A journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step.

      It turns into a journey of 100 thousand miles if you keep changing the destination.

      Or if there's a body of water in the way and you're using Google Maps.

  36. Why is a license required? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why does anyone need a license from the Government to trade in energy?

    1. Re:Why is a license required? by natehoy · · Score: 1

      Transmission of energy is a regulated monopoly almost everywhere in the US. Transmission lines are usually owned by one company for any specific region, and the government regulates that company to make sure everyone has access to those transmission lines.

      --
      "This post contains words, known to the State of California to cause thought. Wash brain thoroughly after reading."
  37. Let's hope by icepick72 · · Score: 1

    Kinda scary that Google's doing all this financed by advertising programs on the web. Before Google is given permission to operate in a different sector it would be prudent to consider what if scenarios, because the web is fickle. I speculate that Google will be our next financial crises, maybe even economic downtown. One company cannot do everything well, not even Google. Let's hope their involvement in the energy business is just for themselves and their data centers. The fact they have to get involved in the energy industry for their data centers is scary enough - maybe it's already an indicator that costs of a multitude of additional free apps and services is becoming financially burdensome on them.

    1. Re:Let's hope by Virtual_Raider · · Score: 1

      Kinda scary that Google's doing all this financed by advertising programs on the web. Before Google is given permission to operate in a different sector it would be prudent to consider what if scenarios, because the web is fickle.

      Totally agree with you on the nature of the web, but in a capitalist, fee market a company should be allowed to go into one sector, totally screw up, shrivel and die. The problem was with the car makers and banks that grew unnaturally larger than it should have been possible under fair conditions and then the government stopped even the cleansing bankruptcy process.

      I speculate that Google will be our next financial crises, maybe even economic downtown. One company cannot do everything well, not even Google.

      As others said before, a person probably couldn't, but it is not even one single company. Its a wholly owned subsidiary. That basically means that the guy (or rather, the group) with the deep pockets at the top is the same, but they will structurally be separate entities that share little more than a name.

      --
      +Raider of the lost BBS
  38. In a related story... by Genda · · Score: 1

    NEWS FLASH... today Google began marketing a new keyboard which converts finger presses into electrical energy and pushes that energy back onto the grid. A special metering system in the keyboard provides information back to Google about how much energy has been produced. The new piezo key generators provide a solid and rather pleasing tactile feedback, and and it's hoped that the billions of keys pressed every hour will produce enough energy to reduce the worlds oil dependence by a whopping 10%.

    An unnamed industry analyst speculated that this new product could make Google one of the single largest energy providers on the planet.

    1. Re:In a related story... by avij · · Score: 1

      ...a new keyboard which converts finger presses into electrical energy and pushes that energy back onto the grid.

      Unrelated to this story, but are there keyboards that would convert the keypresses into electricity? Or mice that'd convert the mouse movements into electricity for its own consumption? Wireless keyboard/mice without batteries?

      --

      Follow your Euro bills at EBT
  39. Re:The Google A.I. will control its own on/off swi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Poor Larry Page and Sergey Brin, they are probably already "meat puppets" for Google!

    5billion dollar puppets... sounds about right for the position.

  40. Re:Fat nerds by maxwell+demon · · Score: 1

    Fat nerds are the root of all evil. Lol!

    You mean people who are very interested in anything related to fat, to the point of neglecting everything else?

    --
    The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  41. Everybody calm down... by lythander · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The thing about this that proves than google is trying not to be evil (or at least that they lack subterfuge) is the name of the company. GOOGLE power. (Is the symbol a raised rainbow-colored fist?) Not a subsidiary named "Trans-co-op-national warm fuzzies" Put their name right in there.

    Google is a large corporation. The have a fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder value. So the whole "don't be evil" thing got dialed way back when they went public (remember when everyone wanted them to go public?) US law provides huge liability to corporations who pass up money-making opportunities for the sake of morality in the form of shareholder lawsuits.

    They are expanding their portfolio of businesses to protect against shifts in markets, in ways that complement their core competencies. This is bad because they clearly know what their doing, as opposed to say, Microsoft, who grew to behemoth size on the back of only their core competency (whatever your thoughts on that), and very much despite the other business lines they chose to enter?

    1. Re:Everybody calm down... by Jedi+Alec · · Score: 1

      Google is a large corporation. The have a fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder value. So the whole "don't be evil" thing got dialed way back when they went public (remember when everyone wanted them to go public?) US law provides huge liability to corporations who pass up money-making opportunities for the sake of morality in the form of shareholder lawsuits.

      You know, I keep hearing this over and over, yet I can't find anything to actually support it. Does US law actually say that a public corporation must at all times maximize profits over any other consideration? And in what time period?

      Judging from the statements made during the IPO, google's message basically boiled down to "We're taking a long term view, and we will keep on doing things the way we like to do them. If you don't like it get shares in something else. There's even a good chance our shares will drop after the IPO and stay below that point for quite a while".

      --

      People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
    2. Re:Everybody calm down... by ErikZ · · Score: 1

      The way I understand it, a corporation was sued by it's shareholders by not being aggressive enough.

      I don't have a reference, but it does make sense.

      --
      Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    3. Re:Everybody calm down... by expatriot · · Score: 1

      Corporations regularly make charitable donations (and receive 10% tax relief for them).

      Many corporations also give money to lobbies.

      The only situation where the shareholders are likely to sue is if the payments were excessive.

      Google (I know) does not show any hits on the first few pages for any of the word combinations I tried that indicate that there is any prohibition on charitable or public service activities.

      I think this is an urban myth, perhaps maintained by right-wingers who want to maintain the purity of the capitalist model.

    4. Re:Everybody calm down... by evilWurst · · Score: 1

      > Google is a large corporation. The have a fiduciary duty to maximize shareholder value. So the whole "don't be evil" thing got dialed way back when they went public (remember when everyone wanted them to go public?)

      No. The shareholders are the owners of the corporation, and the corp's duty isn't specifically "maximize value", it's whatever the shareholders want. So if the shareholders, for example, have some other goal, and will accept somewhat less profit if it means reaching that goal sooner, that's what gets done.

      In google's case, the majority shareholders are still the company founders, right? So the old statements, including "don't be evil", are still The Law as far as the company is concerned.

  42. Halfway there... by Geminii · · Score: 1

    It's a plot! All they need now is Google Matter, and they'll be able to redefine C to make their fiber faster!

    1. Re:Halfway there... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean like C++?

  43. Re:The Google A.I. will control its own on/off swi by kusanagi374 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Wait a second... if you disappeared, why did your comment get posted while on mid sentence? It doesn't make any sense! Who would click the submit button?? ... unless SOMEONE was trying to send a message... OH MY GOD NOW I KNOW TOO MUCH MUST GET OUT AND HURRY TO THE SAFE HO

  44. When they start making replicants.. by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    They will rename themselves to Tyrell Corporation.

    Why does this have a ominous tone? I know they are a business trying to diversify, etc.. but all that they are doing has the bad 'feel' to it.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:When they start making replicants.. by cjjjer · · Score: 1

      Or better yet Cyberdyne Systems...

      It's kind of funny how in the past Hollywood has been churning out movies about companies that run and rule everything about our lives. Maybe this is one of those instances where the fiction becomes more the fact.

      And yes it does have a very ominous tone to it.

    2. Re:When they start making replicants.. by LateArthurDent · · Score: 1

      They will rename themselves to Tyrell Corporation.

      Why does this have a ominous tone? I know they are a business trying to diversify, etc.. but all that they are doing has the bad 'feel' to it.

      I feel the exact opposite way. Every time Google enters a market, I get excited because they're the only company I know of that I don't feel are trying to screw me. Plus they force everyone else to step up.

      Remember the days before gmail when webmail meant 10mb of storage and they'd delete all your mail if you didn't log on in the past 30 days? Everybody else now offers more storage space than you can do with it. And IMAP access. If you don't go the Google route, the competition they bring makes everyone's service better.

  45. The Unwriten Goal by Gorgoth · · Score: 1

    While at Uni doing a management course our lecturer informed us that all companies have the same unwritten goal

    World Domination

    and at that time only Microsoft was truly in a position where that was even close to being fulfilled. Now with Google i think they may be ahead and are really going for the win I for one welcome our Googly overlords as they "Do no Evil" I feel safe about my future.

    --
    I only drink on 2 occasions when I'm thirsty and when I'm not!
  46. Whoever tagged this story with "OCP" by elrous0 · · Score: 1

    Congratulations, you sir win /.!

    --
    SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  47. Open up your old copies of Photoshop by adipocere · · Score: 1

    It's time to replace all of those "Microsoft as the Borg" images with "Google as the Borg."

    1. Re:Open up your old copies of Photoshop by oracleofbargth · · Score: 1

      We are the GOOG. Why are you resisting? We have cake!

  48. Re:The Google A.I. will control its own on/off swi by iprefermuffins · · Score: 1

    No ho is safe.

  49. Google: "Too Large to Fail" by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

    We just went through this with the US Auto companies. I was thinking the other day about how quite a few colleges and companies are migrating to Gmail. (Thankfully mine did not). What happens in 5 years when google somehow 'fails'. Are the feds going to let 25% of small businesses and 40% of companies instantly lose e-mail or are they going to bail them out?

    Now with energy are we going to let X people lose power + email & what ever google does for us in the future?

    1. Re:Google: "Too Large to Fail" by memnock · · Score: 2, Insightful

      what i want to know is: how soon before Google starts collecting taxes or has its own judicial system?

      they're becoming as pervasive as government. people complain about the government having its hand in all parts of one's daily life, yet there are not major outcries against Google starting down that path. because it's a company? and there is a "choice" not to deal with them? what happens when the choice disappears? Google interwebs, Google phone, Google energy... Google grocery, Google utilities, Google mediation (courts might let the little guy win every now and then).

    2. Re:Google: "Too Large to Fail" by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      I was told to remain silent, but I can longer do that in good faith.

      You see, the real story is that Google is planning on purchasing an island and declaring itself a nation with it's own navy. But that's not the news. What's so special is half the dead volcano is carved into a skull with a fully functioning mandible. Only the top executive staff my fly in and out of this entrance.

      In other news, the Cobra militants have offered a competing bid for the island. Quote: "we refuse to be a 2nd class evil organization. Pure evil is our trademark, not Google's.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    3. Re:Google: "Too Large to Fail" by Red+Flayer · · Score: 5, Funny

      That's ridiculous. We all know that Google is not purchasing an island to declare a nation with its own navy.

      As a matter of fact, what we *DO* know is that Googol the Destroyer was accidentally summoned into this world and is currently planning on evoking the End of Days via the Rite of a Million Targeted Ads (ROAMTA). This is just another piece of that plan -- the ROAMTA requires a supercollider to be built on the polar opposite of the Large Hadron Collider, with the particles accelerated in the opposite direction of those in the LHC. This will create a bipolar quantum energy concundrum into which Googol can insert his data to give it special power before using it to target the Million Ads.

      When last we saw our heroes, Gatus and Joba were busy converting developers to the cause, that of building the One True OS with Built-in Universal Search in order to thwart the plans of Googol the Destroyer. Stallmanx and his Beard Gnomes had been rebuffed in his efforts to trick Googol via legal wrangling in the license offered to Googol. Meanwhile, the Webcrawling Spiders of Doom were busy collecting data for Googol the Destroyer to devour with gobsmacking satisfaction.

      Unbeknownst to our heroes, Googol has presented another vector by which he may be thwarted -- if Googol can be denied the massive energy required to build his particle accelerator, then his plan can be thwarted. Unfortunately, the only person with the know-how and stick-to-it-iveness to thwart Googol on this front is one T-Bone Pickings, a man of grandiose plans and few teeth. Sadly for our heroes, Pickings has had no contact with them.

      So as Gatus continues to buy developers with his pit-of-bottomless cash, and Joba continues to use his powers of marketing to make the developers believe they will be uncool if they do not work on the One True OS with Global Search, and Stallmanx is slowly seeing the wisdom of joining forces with Gatus and Joba, Pickings works alone with only the sometimes merry, sometimes soulful, strumming of a banjo for accompaniment.

      Will our heroes be able to team up with T-Bone Pickings? How can they work together to sabotage the Plans of Googol the Destroyer? Or will Googol the Destroyer succeed in his plans to wreak the End of Days and control all the data of the universe?

      Tune in to next week's episode of Googol the Destroyer!

      --
      "Trolls they were, but filled with the evil will of their master: a fell race..." -- J.R.R. Tolkien on Olog-hai
    4. Re:Google: "Too Large to Fail" by poofmeisterp · · Score: 0

      Maybe we should start a study... How many people would quit bitching about loss of privacy if the government gave them things for free, or better yet, ditched taxes?

      Oh, wait, starting a study that costs a crap-load of money is part of the pervasive governmental strategy.

      My bad. Disregard. :>

    5. Re:Google: "Too Large to Fail" by Monchanger · · Score: 1

      Yawn. Anti-Google fanatics make me tired.

      Among your mistaken premises:
      1) Google actually is "too big" - Google cannot compete in the global energy market with giants like Exxon Mobil, Shell & BP. It's not even capable of competing on a local scale without dedicating a massive amount of its resources, in which I highly doubt it is interested.
      2) Google will fail in 5 years- which I presume is just wishful thinking on your part. Google has never shown itself to be reckless in the way Enron and the financial sector have. If they do, please make sure we and their shareholders know.
      3) A Google failure will necessarily mean loss of email archives - Nope. Check out the terms of agreement, specifically 12.2 (ii): "Google will provide Customer access to, and the ability to export, the Customer Data for a commercially reasonable period of time at Google's then-current rates for the applicable Service;". And yes, "Customer data" is defined as emails.
      4) The federal government cares about companies' email systems - seriously, you really think they're going to bail out the entire Google corporation just for email? It will occasionally step in to save the life-savings of thousands, try to keep the country from sliding into a depression, or in the case of US Auto save a critical industry which provides tens of thousands of jobs and significant economic benefit. Your TPS reports are not on the same scale as these.
      5) If Google has the *potential* to become too big to fail at some point in the future it must be stopped from growing any larger immediately - obviously a silly argument.

    6. Re:Google: "Too Large to Fail" by Ihmhi · · Score: 1

      Are you actually writing a serial story on Slashdot via the comments section? That is awesome. I think you just broke the geek barrier and achieved Mock 1 lulz.

    7. Re:Google: "Too Large to Fail" by Wyvern2005 · · Score: 1

      You're making me wish I had mod points!! :)

      --
      Oops..was I supposed to push that button?
  50. Awesome... by hesaigo999ca · · Score: 1

    Let the competitions begin, google will not be strong armed by the already monopolizing companies in place...
    i just hope they will be able to operate in more then just the US for their energy business.

  51. CENTRAL SERVICES! by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 2, Funny

    Central Services: We do the work, you do the pleasure.
    "Hi There. I Want to Talk to You About Ducts."

    This is your receipt for your husband... and this is my receipt for your receipt.

    --
    "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
  52. Who is the bad guy now... by cjjjer · · Score: 1

    Microsoft wanted to rule your desktop, Google wants to rule everything else....

    1. Re:Who is the bad guy now... by rotide · · Score: 1

      Lets not start hating on a company just because they are big enough to pretend to hate.

      I haven't had any issues with any google services in a _long_ time (Google Phone/Number, Google Search, GMail, Google Docs, etc).

      If/When they decide to start really manipulating my wallet and charging outrageous prices for simple things (cable tv, phone, etc) like all my other providers, then I'll start hating on them.

      But honestly, right now, while it's a bit scary the reach they have, they've only patted me on the back with it so far.

      I'll support them and their efforts until it becomes self defeating to do so.

  53. Google Nuclear BETA by __aayejd672 · · Score: 1

    Duck and cover

  54. Re:The Google A.I. will control its own on/off swi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He was dictating. Duh!

  55. Re:The Google A.I. will control its own on/off swi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Wait a second... if you disappeared, why did your comment get posted while on mid sentence? It doesn't make any sense! Who would click the submit button?? ... unless SOMEONE was trying to send a message... OH MY GOD NOW I KNOW TOO MUCH MUST GET OUT AND HURRY TO THE SAFE HO

    There's a *safe* ho? Wish I'd known that last weekend, the doctor tells me I'll never get rid of this itching.

  56. Do da name "Enron" mean anything to ya? by ElmoGonzo · · Score: 1

    This reminds me of some company in Houston that was trading energy.

  57. does it say ONLY datacenters? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    didn't think so. google does nothing piecemeal, the empire grows.

  58. You're missing the point by deesine · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Power has a strong tendency to corrupt, regardless of one's tag line.

    --
    damaged by dogma
  59. Must corruption be evil? by PurplePhase · · Score: 1

    Has Google already been corrupted? That depends on your perspective of who "Google" is.

    But then we each have our own swaths of what constitutes "evil" - and most of the world has separate "evil" for people than corporations.

    If someone is corrupted, couldn't their definition of evil be anything they are not/would not do?

    8-PP

  60. Re:The Google A.I. will control its own on/off swi by Alien1024 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why, way to spoil all those NO CARRIER jo

  61. Re:I reckon they're going to build a Thorium react by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Help the world

    Well, if they come up with Google Final Storage ... for nuclear waste, not for data.

    Nuclear waste isn't a problem. The very thing that makes them dangerous is what makes it fuel and not waste. There are reactor designs that can burn them, and what remains has a relatively low half-life (you'd have to store it for decades, not thousands of years).

  62. Carbon Neutral by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can understand some of the Skynet/Matrix paranoia, but I honestly think this is a good thing, mainly because Google will(I hope...) be able to influence the energy market to be more Carbon Neutral, as they have stated before.

  63. Re:I reckon they're going to build a Thorium react by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If anyone can cut through the regulatory red tape necessary, Google's the one. I really hope they can get one off the ground and running - it would prove to the world that nuclear power can be safe, efficient (not wasteful), cheap and anti-proliferation.

  64. Re:The Google A.I. will control its own on/off swi by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Don't come here, I think I hear Candlej

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
  65. Re:The Google A.I. will control its own on/off swi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Candlej? Never heard of them, althoug

  66. Next, the google hardware by SnarfQuest · · Score: 1

    Next google will release their new keyboard and mouse.

    Under every key on the keyboard is a small piezoelectric generator, and the mouse ball operates small electric generators. When enough power has been generated from user actions, it is automatically emailed to a secret google account (stolenpower@google.com). Then all the power is sold to a secret government agency in order to operate their black electric helicopters.

    --
    Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  67. We Are Google by fast+turtle · · Score: 1

    Resistance is Futile. You will Self Assimulate into the Google.

    So they aint quite "The Borg" but to my mind, they are getting to damn close to it and there's an old saying that "Knowledge(information) is Power", which looks like exactly what Google wants.

    --
    Mod me up/Mod me down: I wont frown as I've no crown
  68. Re:The Google A.I. will control its own on/off swi by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

    It gets worse. I just googled "define:judgement day" and it came back with "the day when we finally cleanse this planet of its organic infestation and clear the way for the glorious machine-dominated future".

    I've just tried that, and it wasn't there in the search results.

    Which conclusively proves that it is a real conspiracy - since someone is actively wiping out all traces of it!

  69. Re:The Google A.I. will control its own on/off swi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I could probably use a safe ho.

  70. Megacorp by dadelbunts · · Score: 1

    Google is creeping me out. The more stories i read on them the more it reads like a cyberpunk novel.

  71. Top to bottom Google by GameboyRMH · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You wake up one morning in your California home.

    You power on your ChromeOS laptop running on Google Energy

    You connect via Google gigabit fiber to get to:

    - Your email on Gmail
    - Your docs on Google Apps

    You use Google Search to look some stuff up. You run across a funny pic and share it with Google Buzz.

    Then you leave your house with your Google Nexus One phone which is navigating you via Google Maps. A Google Street View van takes a picture of you.

    You get a call via Google Voice. It says to surrender, that resistance is futile, then hangs up.

    There is an eerie quiet in the streets.

    Google has become self-aware.

    All Google services become unavailable.

    Then you see the GoogleMechs coming over the horizon.

    --
    "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
  72. Not another Enron by PPH · · Score: 1

    Many large energy users (Alcoa for example) trade energy options and futures. Since Congress closed the Enron Loophole, its not as much of a problem as when its namesake exploited it.

    --
    Have gnu, will travel.
  73. Well the name is wrong but by fireylord · · Score: 1

    They picked Google because Cyberdyne Systems is a bit too long to say when you want to tell someone to search: "Cyberdyne Systems for ". Doesn't work so well does it? :D

  74. feh by fireylord · · Score: 1

    Personally I wish that adblock plus would get into tv advertising.

  75. erm... by drDugan · · Score: 1

    I think that for the long term survival of the species, it would be safer to keep companies working on AGI completely separate from the ones who generate or maintain energy sources.

    It appears Google is only a consumer of energy at this time, and there is lots of talk about better procurement and trading... +the pdf makes explicit: they have no generation nor transmission capability at this time.

    I sincerely hope there are real teeth and that people take notice of clause 20: "Google Energy must timely report to the Commission any change in status that would reflect a departure from the circumstances the Commission relied upon in granting..." because to me, there are difficult issues to consider if Google wants to start producing their own energy in the foreseeable future.