8 ms·

So the _average_ energy company has twice as high RPE as Google? That's unexpected...

by fwdpropaganda 8y ago

soared 8y ago
Not really.. the article explains that energy relies on natural resources while google relies on human capital.
throwaway2048 8y ago
Most of the field work energy companies do is subcontracted out, and wouldnt be covered in these numbers.
coldtea 8y ago
If Google disappeared tomorrow nothing would be tragically different after a year or so of adjustment. Without the energy companies we'd be in Mad Max mode for decades...
- pkaye 8y ago
  You are comparing one company Google against all the energy companies. You should say it differently. What if Google disappeared vs Exxon disappeared.
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >You are comparing one company Google against all the energy companies. Doesn't matter for my point, Google is the majority of web search in the west. Even if we add Bing and that Chinese engine, the argument is the same. Can read it as "if we lost web search".
- TeMPOraL 8y ago
  > If Google disappeared tomorrow nothing would be tragically different after a year or so of adjustment. I wouldn't be so sure. Google Search and Google Maps disappearing would be mildly annoying, but people would adjust. But if GMail and Google Docs (both personal and business GSuite versions) were to suddenly shut off, I dread the impact it would have on the economy. It would seriously disrupt many, if not most, small companies in very many places around the world. The extent to which people depend on Google for their data is just scary. Whatever technical literacy a typical person might have gained in the desktop era, we're losing it again in the mobile era.
  - simula67 8y ago
    Google search ( and all web search engines ) disappearing would probably cause serious productivity decline in many fields like law enforcement, research and development, supply chain management etc Being able to acquire, understand and act on the right information at the right time is probably extremely important to our civilization
    - coldtea 8y ago
      >Being able to acquire, understand and act on the right information at the right time is probably extremely important to our civilization It's important but not that much. We did just fine without it in the 90s, 80s, and 70s and earlier. So at best we'd be back to the 80s level of efficiency. Without energy and fossil fuels (and with no time to adjust to alternative sources, e.g. in a sudden disappearance) we'd get to pre-1920 age levels. Cars wouldn't move, factories wouldn't work, no cargo transport, etc. Losing "the right information at the right time" of the kind Google provides would be a walk in the park compared to that. It's just that people tend to take for granted what earlier and not so glamorous foundations offer.
      - throwawayjava 8y ago
        Again, I think this comparison is a bit contrived -- an entire industry vs. one product at one company. Google's search engine disappearing is more analogous to a railroad or pipeline subsidiary of an oil company. Life would continue, the railway/pipeline would be rebuilt, and in 10 years everything would be back to normal. If you want to make an accurate analogy, compare the disappearance of oil to the disappearance of all modern computing. Both would be catastrophic. Society is complex and has lots of interdependencies.
        coldtea 8y ago
        >Again, I think this comparison is a bit contrived -- an entire industry vs. one product at one company. Google's search engine disappearing is more analogous to a railroad or pipeline subsidiary of an oil company. You're focusing on the wrong thing on my argument. I used Google as a stand-in for web search in general -- regardless of company. Because for me, and most of the west, Google is that: all of search. My argument wasn't really about the one company, or about not being able to replace the company (we could just use Bing and make do with it if that was all I meant it for). What's more, I also think my argument would hold even if taken to mean the web in general (and not just search). It would still be less catastrophic (and quite mild after a small re-adjustment period) than losing the fossil energy sector. >If you want to make an accurate analogy, compare the disappearance of oil to the disappearance of all modern computing. Both would be catastrophic. Both would be catastrophic but the latter less so. We did fine with minimal to no computers in the 60s. We can always go back to that level, which is not that savage or even old. Without fossil fuels (and no transition period to slowly replace them in toto with alternative sources) there would be zombie apocalypse levels of mayhem.
rcxdude 8y ago
Energy is a high-revenue, high-cost business. They make huge profit on volume but on very thin margins.

So the _average_ energy company has twice as high RPE as Google? That's unexpected...

soared 8y ago

Not really.. the article explains that energy relies on natural resources while google relies on human capital.

throwaway2048 8y ago

Most of the field work energy companies do is subcontracted out, and wouldnt be covered in these numbers.

coldtea 8y ago

If Google disappeared tomorrow nothing would be tragically different after a year or so of adjustment. Without the energy companies we'd be in Mad Max mode for decades...

pkaye 8y ago
You are comparing one company Google against all the energy companies. You should say it differently. What if Google disappeared vs Exxon disappeared.
- coldtea 8y ago
  >You are comparing one company Google against all the energy companies. Doesn't matter for my point, Google is the majority of web search in the west. Even if we add Bing and that Chinese engine, the argument is the same. Can read it as "if we lost web search".
TeMPOraL 8y ago
> If Google disappeared tomorrow nothing would be tragically different after a year or so of adjustment. I wouldn't be so sure. Google Search and Google Maps disappearing would be mildly annoying, but people would adjust. But if GMail and Google Docs (both personal and business GSuite versions) were to suddenly shut off, I dread the impact it would have on the economy. It would seriously disrupt many, if not most, small companies in very many places around the world. The extent to which people depend on Google for their data is just scary. Whatever technical literacy a typical person might have gained in the desktop era, we're losing it again in the mobile era.
- simula67 8y ago
  Google search ( and all web search engines ) disappearing would probably cause serious productivity decline in many fields like law enforcement, research and development, supply chain management etc Being able to acquire, understand and act on the right information at the right time is probably extremely important to our civilization
  - coldtea 8y ago
    >Being able to acquire, understand and act on the right information at the right time is probably extremely important to our civilization It's important but not that much. We did just fine without it in the 90s, 80s, and 70s and earlier. So at best we'd be back to the 80s level of efficiency. Without energy and fossil fuels (and with no time to adjust to alternative sources, e.g. in a sudden disappearance) we'd get to pre-1920 age levels. Cars wouldn't move, factories wouldn't work, no cargo transport, etc. Losing "the right information at the right time" of the kind Google provides would be a walk in the park compared to that. It's just that people tend to take for granted what earlier and not so glamorous foundations offer.
    - throwawayjava 8y ago
      Again, I think this comparison is a bit contrived -- an entire industry vs. one product at one company. Google's search engine disappearing is more analogous to a railroad or pipeline subsidiary of an oil company. Life would continue, the railway/pipeline would be rebuilt, and in 10 years everything would be back to normal. If you want to make an accurate analogy, compare the disappearance of oil to the disappearance of all modern computing. Both would be catastrophic. Society is complex and has lots of interdependencies.
      - coldtea 8y ago
        >Again, I think this comparison is a bit contrived -- an entire industry vs. one product at one company. Google's search engine disappearing is more analogous to a railroad or pipeline subsidiary of an oil company. You're focusing on the wrong thing on my argument. I used Google as a stand-in for web search in general -- regardless of company. Because for me, and most of the west, Google is that: all of search. My argument wasn't really about the one company, or about not being able to replace the company (we could just use Bing and make do with it if that was all I meant it for). What's more, I also think my argument would hold even if taken to mean the web in general (and not just search). It would still be less catastrophic (and quite mild after a small re-adjustment period) than losing the fossil energy sector. >If you want to make an accurate analogy, compare the disappearance of oil to the disappearance of all modern computing. Both would be catastrophic. Both would be catastrophic but the latter less so. We did fine with minimal to no computers in the 60s. We can always go back to that level, which is not that savage or even old. Without fossil fuels (and no transition period to slowly replace them in toto with alternative sources) there would be zombie apocalypse levels of mayhem.

rcxdude 8y ago

Energy is a high-revenue, high-cost business. They make huge profit on volume but on very thin margins.