DOCSLIB.ORG

Dan Lipschultz Matt Schuerger Katie J. Sieben John A. Tuma

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

PUBLIC DOCUMENT—NOT PUBLIC DATA HAS BEEN EXCISED STATE OF MINNESOTA BEFORE THE MINNESOTA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION Dan Lipschultz Commissioner Matt Schuerger Commissioner Katie J. Sieben Commissioner John A. Tuma Commissioner IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF DOCKET NO. E002/M-19-___ NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY FOR APPROVAL OF CONTRACTS FOR PETITION PROVISION OF ELECTRIC SERVICE TO GOOGLE’S MINNESOTA DATA CENTER PROJECT Northern States Power Company, doing business as Xcel Energy (Xcel Energy or the Company), is pleased to announce that it has entered into several agreements that will enable it to provide electric service to a proposed new data center to be owned and operated by a subsidiary of Google LLC (Google) in Becker, Minnesota. If the project moves forward, the project would generate at least $600 million in capital investment. In addition to the large capital investment, one of the most compelling aspects of this project is that it will be located on property adjacent to the Company’s Sherco coal plants. And by locating there, this project will assist the Company’s efforts – in partnership with local, regional, and state-wide stakeholders – to mindfully transition a coal-plant environment into a less carbon-intensive, business-oriented area that creates new jobs, results in significant private capital investment in the state, and benefits all of the Company’s customers. The Company respectfully requests the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (Commission) approve the proposed agreements and other rates, terms, and tariff revisions described in this Petition. To enable this project to move forward, time is of the essence, and thus we respectfully ask the Commission to make a decision on this Petition before the end of the second quarter of this year. INTRODUCTION In October 2015, the Company announced its intention to close Sherco Units 1 and 2 – two of the Company’s remaining four coal plants. The Company was aware of the potential impacts that its decision would have on the City of Becker, Sherburne County, and our employees. As a result, the Company made the following PUBLIC DOCUMENT—NOT PUBLIC DATA HAS BEEN EXCISED commitments to our employees and these host communities. For our employees, we committed to an orderly transition that would include job retraining and other assistance to minimize employee impacts. With respect to the Becker community, we committed to exploring ways to use our existing infrastructure to bring new commercial and development opportunities to the area. Examples of our role in helping with these redevelopment efforts include the following. First, we have been working closely with Liberty Paper, one of our largest customers, on assuring that we continue to provide them with adequate steam resources upon the retirement of Sherco Units 1 and 2. By doing so, we are helping Liberty Paper remain a mainstay in the City of Becker and Sherburne County communities. Secondly, we helped our existing customer Northern Metals Recycling relocate its operations from north Minneapolis to a parcel of land near the Sherco plant. Northern Metals is under construction now and when it opens its facility in 2019, it will bring 85 jobs to the area, with the potential to hire 140 workers. We also have been working in partnership with the host communities, regional and state business organizations, and state agencies – particularly the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) – to certify parcels of land on the Sherco plant site for economic development and have been actively marketing those parcels for economic development opportunities, including to businesses outside of Minnesota. After a year and a half of due diligence and contract negotiations, Google’s data center campus stands to be the Company’s first out-of-state company to the site and the state’s first major data center. If the project moves forward, it would generate at least $600 million in capital investment, making it one of the largest private development projects in state history. The local and state-wide benefits are significant. Based on economic studies evaluating the benefits of similar data center campuses, DEED projects that the initial construction will create nearly 2,000 jobs in Sherburne County and 1,300 additional state-wide jobs, and approximately 50 new permanent jobs in the technology industry with an aggregate payroll expected to exceed $4 million/year.1 DEED further projects an almost $150 million increase in state gross domestic product (GDP).2 As explained further below, nationally in 2016, Google data centers generated $1.3 billion in economic activity, $750 million in labor income, and approximately 11,000 1 MINN.DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, IMPLAN ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 5 (Oct. 2018) (attached to this Petition as Attachment C and referred to hereinafter as such). 2 Attachment C at 7. 2 PUBLIC DOCUMENT—NOT PUBLIC DATA HAS BEEN EXCISED new jobs.3 Overall, Google has invested approximately $10.5 billion in its U.S. data centers, creating approximately 1,900 permanent, full-time employees in Google’s six data centers currently in operation. Because these centers undergo regular expansion and upgrades, the data centers continually employ a significant number of full-time construction workers across the six current campuses each year. Google’s data centers also stimulate job growth in a number of unrelated industries, including trade, transport, utilities, professional and business services, and leisure and hospitality. Within three years of their Google data centers opening, Douglas County, Georgia gained 5,595 jobs; Berkeley County, South Carolina gained 2,378; and Pottawattamie County, Iowa gained 1,185 jobs.4 In addition to these local, regional, and state benefits, the Company is pleased that the contractual arrangements it presents here are consistent with and further our three strategic priorities: Leading the Clean Energy Transition, Keeping Bills Low, and Enhancing the Customer Experience, and, as such, benefit all of our customers. Leading the Clean Energy Transition Xcel Energy is a nation-leading renewable energy provider. In fact, the NSP System will have a generation mix comprised of over 46 percent renewables by 2022. Xcel Energy also recently announced a nation-leading goal to deliver 100 percent carbon- free electricity to customers by 2050. As part of this goal, the Company also announced plans to reduce carbon emissions 80 percent by 2030, from 2005 levels in the eight states it serves. At the same time, Xcel Energy has kept and will continue to keep affordability as a guiding principle. Google is also a pioneer and leader in accelerating the adoption of renewable energy. Since 2007, Google has been carbon neutral; renewable energy has been a significant component of that. Google has procured more than 3 gigawatts of wind and solar power in order to match its total annual electricity consumption, making it the largest corporate purchaser of renewable energy in the world. In 2017, Google reached the important milestone of matching 100 percent of its global electricity consumption with renewable energy. Google is striving to maintain its 100 percent renewable energy match and to go even further, by sourcing carbon-free energy for its operations on a 24/7 basis. 3 OXFORD ECONOMICS,GOOGLE DATA CENTERS ECONOMIC IMPACT AND COMMUNITY BENEFIT 4 (Apr. 2018) (attached to this Petition as Attachment A and referred to hereinafter as such). 4 Attachment A at 19. 3 PUBLIC DOCUMENT—NOT PUBLIC DATA HAS BEEN EXCISED Under the terms of the contracts that will serve the proposed Becker data center, the Company has agreed to procure new, incremental renewable energy resources that will be used to match the data center’s annual energy usage. To incentivize Google to grow the data center campus to as much as [HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL TRADE SECRET BEGINS HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL TRADE SECRET ENDS] megawatts (MW), the Company has agreed to match the data center’s peak load with incremental, new, carbon-free capacity upon reaching that milestone. Through separate petitions, the Company intends to ask the Commission to approve up to 300 MW of power purchase agreements (PPAs) for new wind projects that will be incremental to the NSP System. We are confident we can demonstrate that the PPAs – each of which are eligible for the maximum amount of the production tax credit (PTC) – are in the public interest. For purposes of this Petition, we ask the Commission to approve our sourcing plan as contemplated in the Retail Electric Service Agreement (ESA). Under a likely load growth scenario (i.e., [HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL TRADE SECRET BEGINS HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL TRADE SECRET ENDS] MW at [HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL TRADE SECRET BEGINS HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL TRADE SECRET ENDS] percent load factor) for the initial 10-year term, our analysis demonstrates that our plan provides customer benefits between [TRADE SECRET BEGINS TRADE SECRET ENDS] and is therefore reasonable and prudent. Keeping Bills Low The Company appreciates the importance of assuring that the essential service we provide remains affordable to all customers. We are pleased that average customer bills have remained essentially flat since 2013. While there are many factors that go into our customers’ bills – some in our control and others not – the Company continually looks for opportunities that place downward pressure on them. The Company advanced a significant wind build-out on the NSP System as part of its Steel for Fuel strategy. Additionally, the Company bought out several biomass contracts. Together these efforts will provide over $1 billion in customer cost savings. We continue to explore new opportunities to lower costs for our customers and look forward to bringing those to the Commission as they arise. In addition to lowering costs and expenses, increasing revenues can help keep bills low. And by attracting new customer load to our service territory, Xcel Energy’s economic development efforts help find new revenue.
Recommended publications
  • “Where the Internet Lives” Data Centers As Cloud Infrastructure

    “Where the Internet Lives” Data Centers As Cloud Infrastructure

    C HAPTER 3 “Where the Internet Lives” Data Centers as Cloud Infrastructure JN OEN IFER H LT AND PATRICK VONDERAU mblazoned with the headline “Transparency,” Google released dozens of Einterior and exterior glossy images of their data centers on the company’s website in 2012. Inviting the public to “come inside” and “see where the In- ternet lives,” Google proudly announced they would reveal “what we’re made of— inside and out” by offering virtual tours through photo galleries of the tech- nology, the people, and the places making up their data centers.1 Google’s tours showed the world a glimpse of these structures with a series of photographs showcasing “the physical Internet,” as the site characterized it. The pictures consisted mainly of slick, artful images of buildings, wires, pipes, servers, and dedicated workers who populate the centers. Apple has also put the infrastructure behind its cloud services on display for the digital audience by featuring a host of infographics, statistics, and polished inside views of the company’s “environmentally responsible” data center fa- cilities on its website.2 Facebook, in turn, features extensive photo and news coverage of its global physical infrastructure on dedicated Facebook pages, while Microsoft presents guided video tours of their server farms for free download on its corporate website.3 Even smaller data centers like those owned by Eu- ropean Internet service provider Bahnhof AB, located in Sweden, are increas- ingly on digital exhibit, with their corporate parents offering various images of server racks, cooling and power technology, or even their meeting rooms, Copyright © ${Date}.
  • Google's Hyperscale Data Centres and Infrastructure Ecosystem in Europe

    Google's Hyperscale Data Centres and Infrastructure Ecosystem in Europe

    GOOGLE’S HYPERSCALE DATA CENTRES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ECOSYSTEM IN EUROPE Economic impact study CLIENT: GOOGLE SEPTEMBER 2019 AUTHORS Dr Bruno Basalisco, Managing economist, Head of Digital Economy service Martin Bo Westh Hansen, Managing economist, Head of Energy & Climate service Tuomas Haanperä, Managing economist Erik Dahlberg, Senior economist Morten May Hansen, Economist Joshua Brown, Analyst Laurids Leo Münier, Analyst 0 Malthe Faber Laursen, Analyst Helge Sigurd Næss-Schmidt, Partner EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Digital transformation is a defining challenge and opportunity for the European economy, provid- ing the means to reinvent and improve how firms, consumers, governments, and citizens interact and do business with each other. European consumers, firms, and society stand to benefit from the resulting innovative products, processes, services, and business models – contributing to EU productivity. To maximise these benefits, it is key that the private and public sector can rely on an advanced and efficient cloud value chain. Considerable literature exists on cloud solutions and their transformative impact across the econ- omy. This report contributes by focusing on the analysis of the cloud value chain, taking Google as a relevant case study. It assesses the economic impact of the Google European hyperscale data cen- tres and related infrastructures which, behind the scenes, underpin online services such as cloud solutions. Thus, the report is an applied analysis of these infrastructure layers “above the cloud” (upstream inputs to deliver cloud solutions) and quantifies Google’s European economic contribu- tion associated with these activities. Double-clicking the cloud Services, such as Google Cloud, are a key example of a set of solutions that can serve a variety of Eu- ropean business needs and thus support economic productivity.
  • Incorporating Authentic Video Into Language-Learning Mobile Applications

    Incorporating Authentic Video Into Language-Learning Mobile Applications

    Incorporating Authentic Video into Language-learning Mobile Applications Andrew Watabe A project submitted to the faculty of Brigham Young University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts J. Paul Warnick, Chair Rob Alan Martinsen Rob Reynolds Center for Language Studies Brigham Young University Copyright © 2021 Andrew Watabe All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Incorporating Authentic Video into Language-learning Mobile Applications Andrew Watabe Center for Language Studies, BYU Master of Arts Authentic content in language materials can provide learners with meaningful contexts that enhance language learning (Shrum & Glisan, 2016). This project seeks to create a Japanese- learning iOS app that teaches language directly from authentic Japanese YouTube videos. The app provides a video library where users can find videos on a variety of topics such as food, music, beauty, and games. Each video features video captions, vocabulary exercises, and grammar drills based on the language used in the video. Students enrolled in Japanese classes at Brigham Young University were asked to test out the app and provide feedback on their experience. The participants enjoyed the authentic content and found the written transcripts of the videos to be helpful to their learning. They also requested additional content and features to improve the app. Based on the participants’ comments, we created a plan of action including future updates for the app. Keywords: CALL, authentic texts, Japanese, scaffolding, mobile apps, YouTube
  • Data Centers

    Data Centers

    REPORT HIGHLIGHTS Technological innovations are rapidly changing our lives, our Heat sensing drones deployed after natural disasters to locate businesses, and our economy. Technology, no longer an isolated survivors and deliver lifesaving equipment can arrive at the scene business sector, is a facilitator enabling innovation, growth, and faster than first responders. Wearable technologies that we sport the strengthening of America’s traditional business sectors. From help us lead healthier lifestyles. Distance learning courses empower transportation and energy to finance and medicine, businesses children and adults to learn new skills or trades to keep up with rely on technology to interact with their customers, improve their the constantly evolving job market. Innovations in science, energy, services, and make their operations more globally competitive. manufacturing, health care, education, transportation and many Innovative technology is deeply integrated into the economy and other fields—and their jobs—are being powered by data centers. is the driving force behind the creation of new jobs in science, health care, education, transportation, and more. Technology has But the benefits of data centers go beyond powering America’s fundamentally transformed our economy—and is poised to fuel even cutting-edge innovations. The economic impact, direct and indirect, more growth in the future. is substantial. Overall, there were 6 million jobs in the U.S. technology industry last While being built, a typical data center employs 1,688 local workers, year, and we expect this to increase by 4.1% in 2017. Technology- provides $77.7 million in wages for those workers, produces $243.5 related jobs run the gamut—from transportation logistics and million in output along the local economy’s supply chain, and warehousing to programmers and radiologists.
  • Mapreduce Programming Oct 30, 2012

    Mapreduce Programming Oct 30, 2012

    15-440" MapReduce Programming Oct 30, 2012" Topics" n" Large-scale computing" l" Traditional high-performance computing (HPC)! l" Cluster computing! n" MapReduce" l" Definition! l" Examples! n" Implementation" n" Alternatives to MapReduce" n" Properties" – 1 –! Typical HPC Machine" Compute Nodes" Compute Nodes n" High end processor(s)" CPU CPU CPU • • • n" Lots of RAM" Mem Mem Mem Network" n" Specialized" Network n" Very high performance" Storage Server" • • • n" RAID-based disk array" Storage Server – 2 –! HPC Machine Example" Jaguar Supercomputer" n" 3rd fastest in world" Compute Nodes" n" 18,688 nodes in largest partition" n" 2X 2.6Ghz 6-core AMD Opteron" n" 16GB memory" n" Total: 2.3 petaflop / 300 TB memory" Network" n" 3D torus" l" Each node connected to 6 neighbors via 6.0 GB/s links! Storage Server" n" 10PB RAID-based disk array" – 3 –! HPC Programming Model" Application Programs Software Packages Machine-Dependent Programming Model Hardware n" Programs described at very low level" l" Specify detailed control of processing & communications! n" Rely on small number of software packages" l" Written by specialists! l" Limits classes of problems & solution methods! – 4 –! Bulk Synchronous Programming" Solving Problem Over Grid" n" E.g., finite-element computation" Partition into Regions" n" p regions for p processors" Map Region per Processor" n" Local computation sequential" n" Periodically communicate boundary values with neighbors" – 5 –! Typical HPC Operation" Characteristics" n" Long-lived processes" Message Passing" n" Make use
  • Envisioning the Cloud: the Next Computing Paradigm

    Envisioning the Cloud: the Next Computing Paradigm

    Marketspace® Point of View Envisioning the Cloud: The Next Computing Paradigm March 20, 2009 Jeffrey F. Rayport Andrew Heyward Research Associates Raj Beri Jake Samuelson Geordie McClelland Funding for this paper was provided by Google, Inc Table of Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................... i Introduction................................................................................................ 1 Understanding the cloud...................................................................... 3 The network is the (very big, very powerful) computer .................... 6 How the data center became possible ............................................. 8 The passengers are driving the bus ...................................................11 Where we go from here......................................................................12 Benefits and Opportunities in the Cloud ..............................................14 Anywhere/anytime access to software............................................14 Specialization and customization of applications...........................17 Collaboration .......................................................................................20 Processing power on demand...........................................................21 Storage as a universal service............................................................23 Cost savings in the cloud ....................................................................24 Enabling the Cloud
  • Alphabet 2020

    Alphabet 2020

    Alphabet Alphabet 2020 Annual 2020 Report 2020 Rev2_210419_YIR_Cover.indd 1-3 4/19/21 7:02 PM Alphabet Year in Review 2020 210414_YIR_Design.indd 1 4/15/21 3:57 PM From our CEO 2 Year in Review 210414_YIR_Design.indd 2 4/15/21 3:57 PM To our investors, You might expect a company’s year in review to open with big numbers: how many products we launched, how many consumers and businesses adopted those products, and how much revenue we generated in the process. And, yes, you will see some big numbers shared in the pages of this report and in future earnings calls as well, but 22-plus years in, Google is still not a conventional company (and we don’t intend to become one). And 2020 was anything but a conventional year. That’s why over the past 12 months we’ve measured our success by the people we’ve helped in moments that matter. Our success is in the researchers who used our technology to fight the spread of the coronavirus. It’s in job seekers like Rey Justo, who, after being laid off during the pandemic, earned a Google Career Certificate online and was hired into a great new career. And our success is in all the small businesses who used Google products to continue serving customers and keeping employees on payroll … in the students who kept learning virtually on Google Classroom … and in the grandparents who read bedtime stories to grandchildren from thousands of miles away over Google Meet. We’ve always believed that we only succeed when others do.
  • Common Labor, Common Lives: the Social Construction of Work in Four Communal Societies, 1774-1932 Peter Andrew Hoehnle Iowa State University

    Common Labor, Common Lives: the Social Construction of Work in Four Communal Societies, 1774-1932 Peter Andrew Hoehnle Iowa State University

    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Retrospective Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2003 Common labor, common lives: the social construction of work in four communal societies, 1774-1932 Peter Andrew Hoehnle Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd Part of the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Hoehnle, Peter Andrew, "Common labor, common lives: the social construction of work in four communal societies, 1774-1932 " (2003). Retrospective Theses and Dissertations. 719. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/rtd/719 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Retrospective Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Common labor, common lives: The social construction of work in four communal societies, 1774-1932 by Peter Andrew Hoehnle A dissertation submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Major: Agricultural History and Rural Studies Program of Study Committee: Dorothy Schwieder, Major Professor Pamela Riney-Kehrberg Christopher M. Curtis Andrejs Plakans Michael Whiteford Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2003 © Copyright Peter Andrew Hoehnle, 2003. All rights reserved. UMI Number: 3118233 INFORMATION TO USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
  • Calico Global V. Calico

    Calico Global V. Calico

    Case 2:17-cv-00643-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/12/17 Page 1 of 13 PageID #: 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION CALICO GLOBAL PTY LTD., Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No.: 2:17-cv-00643 CALICO LLC. GOOGLE, INC., and JURY TRIAL DEMANDED ALPHABET INC., Defendants. PLAINTIFF’S COMPLAINT FOR TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff CALICO GLOBAL PTY LTD. (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff”) brings this suit for trademark infringement Defendants, CALICO LLC (“Calico”). GOOGLE, INC., (“Google”) and ALPHABET INC. (“Alphabet”) (collectively, “Defendants”), and alleges as follows: NATURE OF ACTION 1. This is an action for trademark infringement based upon Defendants having improperly and willfully used a mark nearly identical to Plaintiff’s trademark CALICO, with trademark Registration No. 3,680,863, without permission, thereby causing customer confusion and unfairly competing with Plaintiff by the improper use of Plaintiff’s Trademark. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 2. This action arises under the trademark laws of the United States. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1051 et seq. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a) and (b), as well as 15 U.S.C. §1121. Case 2:17-cv-00643-JRG Document 1 Filed 09/12/17 Page 2 of 13 PageID #: 2 3. Personal jurisdiction exists over the Defendants because they conduct substantial business in Texas, and have ongoing and systematic contacts with this District, and therefore have sufficient contacts such that it would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice to subject Defendants to suit in this forum.
  • In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Marshall Division

    In the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Marshall Division

    Case 2:18-cv-00549 Document 1 Filed 12/30/18 Page 1 of 40 PageID #: 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION UNILOC 2017 LLC § Plaintiff, § CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:18-cv-00549 § v. § § PATENT CASE GOOGLE LLC, § § Defendant. § JURY TRIAL DEMANDED § ORIGINAL COMPLAINT FOR PATENT INFRINGEMENT Plaintiff Uniloc 2017 LLC (“Uniloc”), as and for their complaint against defendant Google LLC (“Google”) allege as follows: THE PARTIES 1. Uniloc is a Delaware limited liability company having places of business at 620 Newport Center Drive, Newport Beach, California 92660 and 102 N. College Avenue, Suite 303, Tyler, Texas 75702. 2. Uniloc holds all substantial rights, title and interest in and to the asserted patent. 3. On information and belief, Google, a Delaware corporation with its principal office at 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043. Google offers its products and/or services, including those accused herein of infringement, to customers and potential customers located in Texas and in the judicial Eastern District of Texas. JURISDICTION 4. Uniloc brings this action for patent infringement under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 271 et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). Page 1 of 40 Case 2:18-cv-00549 Document 1 Filed 12/30/18 Page 2 of 40 PageID #: 2 5. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Google in this action because Google has committed acts within the Eastern District of Texas giving rise to this action and has established minimum contacts with this forum such that the exercise of jurisdiction over Google would not offend traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
  • Google's Approach to IT Security

    Google's Approach to IT Security

    Google’s Approach to IT Security A Google White Paper Introduction . 3 Overview . 3 Google Corporate Security Policies . 3 Organizational Security . 4 Data Asset Management . 5 Access Control . 6 Physical and Environmental Security . 8 Infrastructure Security . 9 Systems Development and Maintenance . 11 Disaster Recovery and Business Continuity . 14 Summary . 14 WHITE PAPER: GOOGle’s APPROACH TO IT SECURITY The security controls that isolate Introduction data during processing in the cloud Google technologies that use cloud computing (including Gmail, Google Calendar, were developed alongside the core technology from the Google Docs, Google App Engine, Google Cloud Storage among others) provide famiiar, beginning . Security is thus a key easy to use products and services for business and personal/consumer settings . These component of each of our services enable users to access their data from Internet-capable devices . This common cloud computing elements . cloud computing environment allows CPU, memory and storage resources to be shared and utilized by many users while also offering security benefits . Google provides these cloud services in a manner drawn from its experience with operating its own business, as well as its core services like Google Search . Security is a design component of each of Google’s cloud computing elements, such as compartmentalization, server assignment, data storage, and processing . This paper will explain the ways Google creates a platform for offering its cloud products, covering topics like information security, physical security and operational security . The policies, procedures and technologies described in this paper are detailed as of the time of authorship . Some of the specifics may change over time as we regularly innovate with new features and products .
  • Why Google Dominates Advertising Markets Competition Policy Should Lean on the Principles of Financial Market Regulation

    Why Google Dominates Advertising Markets Competition Policy Should Lean on the Principles of Financial Market Regulation

    Why Google Dominates Advertising Markets Competition Policy Should Lean on the Principles of Financial Market Regulation Dina Srinivasan* * Since leaving the industry, and authoring The Antitrust Case Against Face- book, I continue to research and write about the high-tech industry and competition, now as a fellow with Yale University’s antitrust initiative, the Thurman Arnold Pro- ject. Separately, I have advised and consulted on antitrust matters, including for news publishers whose interests are in conflict with Google’s. This Article is not squarely about antitrust, though it is about Google’s conduct in advertising markets, and the idea for writing a piece like this first germinated in 2014. At that time, Wall Street was up in arms about a book called FLASH BOYS by Wall Street chronicler Michael Lewis about speed, data, and alleged manipulation in financial markets. The controversy put high speed trading in the news, giving many of us in advertising pause to appre- ciate the parallels between our market and trading in financial markets. Since then, I have noted how problems related to speed and data can distort competition in other electronic trading markets, how lawmakers have monitored these markets for con- duct they frown upon in equities trading, but how advertising has largely remained off the same radar. This Article elaborates on these observations and curiosities. I am indebted to and thank the many journalists that painstakingly reported on industry conduct, the researchers and scholars whose work I cite, Fiona Scott Morton and Aus- tin Frerick at the Thurman Arnold Project for academic support, as well as Tom Fer- guson and the Institute for New Economic Thinking for helping to fund the research this project entailed.