An AI venture backed by Google is teaming up with the US military to harness AI for disaster response. Bellwether, part of Alphabet’s X innovation hub, announced its collaboration with the National Guard and the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) to streamline the Guard’s disaster response processes. The initiative aims to leverage AI and machine learning to rapidly analyse aerial imagery of disaster scenes, identifying damage to critical infrastructure to aid in resource deployment.
Traditionally, the National Guard conducts damage assessments manually, which can lead to delays in the initial response due to the time required for analysis. Bellwether’s prototype utilises AI and ML to analyse disaster-affected areas in seconds, providing labelled maps of affected areas. This technology enables quicker decision-making regarding resource allocation for disaster response teams.
Colonel Brian McGarry, leading the National Guard’s operations division, emphasised the significance of AI in expediting critical information delivery during disasters. By automating routine tasks like image analysis and labelling, AI can significantly accelerate the response process, ultimately saving lives in affected communities.
Why does it matter?
Google’s partnership with Bellwether underscores the potential of AI in disaster response efforts. Additionally, Bellwether is developing a wildfire prediction tool that utilises historical data and environmental factors to forecast fire risk, demonstrating the broader applications of AI in mitigating natural disasters.
Organisators of the demonstrations confirmed that Google has fired an additional 20 employees in response to protests over its cloud-computing contract with the Israeli government. This brings the total number of terminated workers to 50. The group leading the protests, ‘No Tech for Apartheid’, expressed concern that some fired employees were bystanders rather than active participants in the protests, labelling the mass firings as retaliatory.
Confirming the terminations, a Google spokesperson stated that an investigation into disruptions during the protests on 16 April had concluded. The spokesperson emphasised that all dismissed employees were directly involved in disruptive activities within the company’s premises. In response, the worker group vowed to continue their activism within Google, denouncing the company’s actions as an attempt to suppress dissent.
The firings come amidst a broader societal debate over corporate responsibility and workplace activism, particularly regarding issues such as the US government and business support for Israel. CEO Sundar Pichai recently urged Google employees to refrain from discussing politics in the workplace, emphasising the company’s focus on business matters.
The situation underscores tensions between corporate interests and employee activism, raising questions about the boundaries of free expression and dissent within tech companies like Google.
Japan’s antitrust watchdog has issued a directive to Google, stating that the US tech giant must address its advertising search restrictions that affect Yahoo in Japan. According to the Japan Fair Trade Commission, Google’s practices were found to impede fair competition in the advertising market, particularly in relation to Yahoo Japan Corp., which merged with Line, a Japanese social media platform.
The issue stems from Google’s keyword-targeted search advertising services, which Yahoo Japan utilised after a collaboration initiated in 2010. The Fair Trade Commission claims that Google imposed restrictions in its advertising agreement with Yahoo Japan that hindered competition in targeted search ads for over seven years. Google responded by dropping these restrictions following an investigation by the FTC into potential violations of the Anti-Monopoly Law.
In response to the commission’s findings, Google has pledged full cooperation and emphasised that the commission did not find outright violations of anti-monopoly laws. The company committed to implementing the commission’s directives to enhance search functions for Japanese users and advertisers. Meanwhile, Line Yahoo declined to comment on the matter.
Why does it matter?
Google will remain under scrutiny for the next three years to ensure compliance with necessary changes. However, the commission did not impose fines or other penalties on the tech giant, which remains popular in Japan. This action by the commission comes shortly after another legal setback for Google in Japan, where Japanese doctors filed a civil lawsuit against the company for allegedly allowing groundless derogatory and false comments on its platform. In response, Google stated its continuous efforts to combat misleading or false information through human oversight and technological solutions.
A draft report from the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) raises concerns about Google’s Privacy Sandbox, which is aimed at preserving privacy in online ad targeting and analytics. The report highlights gaps that could be exploited to compromise privacy and track individuals online. This technology seeks to replace current tracking methods with more privacy-conscious alternatives, but its credibility hinges on its ability to deliver privacy assurances.
If Google’s Privacy Sandbox fails to address regulatory, community, and competitive challenges, it could collapse, leaving adtech rivals to continue tracking users through existing or alternative methods. The ICO report represents another setback for Google’s attempts to reconcile ad targeting with privacy laws like GDPR. Google’s strategy involves moving ad auction mechanics to users’ local devices through web APIs, such as the Topics API in Chrome, which aims to convey user interests to advertisers without identifying individuals.
Critics, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation and rival browser maker Vivaldi, have raised concerns about the Privacy Sandbox’s support for behavioural advertising and its reliance on advertisers’ good behaviour rather than technical guarantees for privacy. Given Google’s market dominance and significant revenue tied to online advertising, scepticism persists about rebuilding ad architecture on its platforms. Both regulators and industry groups like the IAB have expressed concerns about the Privacy Sandbox’s potential competitive disadvantages and limitations, suggesting that Google may need to address these issues before proceeding.
Despite challenges and criticism, Google remains committed to Privacy Sandbox technologies, emphasising their aim to enhance privacy while maintaining targeted advertising. The company continues to engage with regulators and stakeholders to address concerns and ensure a solution that benefits users and the entire advertising ecosystem.
Google has responded to a bill proposing payment from tech giants like Google and Meta to news publishers by blocking news links for California-based news organisations in search results for certain Californians. Meta, in turn, threatens to block all news links on its social platforms if the bill is enacted.
This decision comes amidst vigorous lobbying efforts from these companies, arguing that the legislation would impose a ‘link tax’ and disrupt the free exchange of information online. Some small news publishers and business groups also oppose the bill, citing fears of diminished discoverability and potential negative consequences for the broader business landscape. On the other hand, proponents argue that such laws are necessary to sustain journalism in an era where traditional revenue streams have dwindled.
Despite labelling its action as a ‘short-term test,’ Google faced sharp criticism from politicians and publishers who condemned the move as an abuse of power. Nonetheless, California news publishers have not yet felt significant repercussions from Google’s actions.
Why does it matter?
In Australia and Canada, heated battles ultimately ended in compromises. Google and the government brokered a deal in Canada, establishing a yearly $73.5 million news fund for Canadian providers. Nevertheless, Meta persists in blocking news links on Facebook and Instagram in Canada, leading to a marked decline in traffic for Canadian news organisations. Meanwhile, the outcome of the standoff in California is still uncertain, but one thing’s for sure: the intense debates will persist.
The UK’s privacy regulator has expressed concerns about Google’s proposed cookie replacements, stating that they must do more to safeguard consumer privacy in the UK. According to internal documents, Google’s Privacy Sandbox initiative, aimed at phasing out third-party cookies and reducing tracking, leaves gaps that could compromise anonymity.
The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has reportedly drafted a report highlighting the potential for exploitation within Google’s proposed technology. Despite Google’s plans to eliminate third-party cookies by the latter half of 2024, the ICO is pushing for changes to enhance privacy protections.
The ICO’s efforts include engaging with the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), which reviews Google’s plans amidst concerns about their potential impact on competition in digital advertising. The CMA has pledged to consider the ICO’s recommendations as part of its evaluation process.
In response, a Google spokesperson emphasised ongoing engagement with privacy and competition regulators globally, aiming to find a solution that benefits users and the digital ecosystem. Both the ICO and CMA have yet to comment on the matter.
Google fired 28 employees on Wednesday following their involvement in protests against a cloud-computing contract shared with Amazon by the Israeli government. The termination came after nine employees were arrested during sit-in protests at Google offices in Sunnyvale, California, and New York City. The group, known as No Tech for Apartheid, has been protesting Google’s deal with Israel since 2021, expressing concerns about bolstering government surveillance and discrimination against Palestinians.
In response to the protests, Google stated that the fired employees had ‘physically impeded other employees’ work’ and violated company policies. The company engaged law enforcement to remove protesters from the premises after multiple requests to leave were refused. The fired employees, locked out of their work devices and informed of their termination via email, expressed shock and anger at Google’s decision, calling it a disproportionate response to their advocacy efforts.
Members of the No Tech for Apartheid group are considering legal action against Google for alleged labour law violations. Despite protesters asserting that they did not impede others from working during the sit-in, Google proceeded with terminations. Meanwhile, Amazon, also involved in the contract, witnessed employee participation in the protests without reports of arrests or firings. Amazon has yet to respond to inquiries regarding the situation.
The proposed California Journalism Preservation Act seeks to mandate digital platforms like Google and Meta to pay a ‘journalism usage fee’ to news outlets when their content is used alongside digital ads. Lawmakers and supporters argue that tech companies benefit financially from sharing content without adequately compensating publishers. The California State Senate President Pro-Tempore criticised Google’s action, calling it an abuse of power and a threat to public safety.
The president and CEO of the California News Publishers Association accused Google of suppressing California news and emphasised the need for legislative action. Google has opposed similar measures in other countries, citing concerns about business uncertainty.
Why does it matter?
Google’s decision to remove links to California news websites calls attention to the ongoing debate over legislation requiring tech giants to pay news outlets for content usage. As more people shift from traditional news outlets to online platforms, there’s growing concern about the increasing control tech companies have over content access. Previous reactions from Google to similar laws in Canada and Australia, where negotiations and voluntary agreements were pursued instead of direct payment for links, suggest a potential trend in how the situation might unfold in California.
Three major players in the AI field, OpenAI, Google, and Mistral, have unveiled new versions of their cutting-edge AI models within 12 hours, signalling a burst of innovation anticipated for the summer. Meta’s Nick Clegg hinted at the imminent release of Meta’s Llama 3 at an event in London, while Google swiftly followed with the launch of its Gemini Pro 1.5, a sophisticated large language model with a limited free usage tier. Shortly after, OpenAI introduced its milestone model, GPT-4 Turbo, which, like Gemini Pro 1.5, supports multimodal input, including images.
In France, Mistral, a startup founded by former Meta AI team members, debuted Mixtral 8x22B, a frontier AI model released as a 281GB download file, following an open-source philosophy. While this approach is criticised for potential risks due to a lack of oversight, it reflects a trend towards democratising access to AI models beyond the control of tech giants like Meta and Google.
Experts caution that the prevailing approach centred on large language models (LLMs) might be reaching its limitations. Meta’s chief AI scientist, Yann LeCun, challenges the notion of imminent artificial general intelligence (AGI) and emphasises the need for AI systems capable of reasoning and planning beyond language manipulation. LeCun advocates for a shift towards ‘objective-driven’ AI to achieve truly superhuman capabilities, thereby highlighting the ongoing evolution and challenges in the AI landscape.
Google unveiled its latest proprietary chip, Axion, demonstrating a willingness to reduce reliance on major chipmakers and bolster its position in the competitive AI landscape. Axion is tailored to manage vast datasets crucial for AI applications and can be grouped into clusters of thousands of chips to enhance performance significantly. According to Google, Axion CPUs outperform existing ‘general-purpose’ chips by about 30%, a move aimed at supporting AI applications within its data centres. Unlike chips aimed at specific business segments, Axion marks Google’s first foray into AI-centric chips for data centre operations.
While customers of Alphabet’s subsidiary will access Axion through Google’s cloud services later this year, the chip won’t be directly purchasable. Google’s vice president, Amin Vahdat, who oversees proprietary chips, emphasised a collaborative approach, avoiding direct competition with longtime partners like Intel and Nvidia. Vahdat views Google’s entry into the chip market as an opportunity to grow the industry collectively, aiming to expand the market rather than capture a share directly from competitors.
In response to Google’s announcement, semiconductor giants like Intel and Nvidia are intensifying their AI chip offerings. Intel recently introduced Gaudi 3, which is expected to be available by the third quarter, focusing on AI applications like training large language models such as ChatGPT. On the other hand, Nvidia plans to launch its latest generation of its H100 chip later this year. Despite Nvidia’s stock decline following Google’s chip reveal, the company has seen substantial growth driven by demand for its powerful chips, now facing heightened competition from rivals like Google in the AI chip market.
Following the news of Axion, Alphabet’s stock rose by 2.4% initially, reflecting investor optimism about Google’s strategic move into AI chips. However, gains moderated later in the day, with Alphabet’s stock closing up 1.28% at approximately $158. Google’s entry into the chip market signals a pivotal shift in its AI strategy, poised to influence the broader semiconductor landscape and competition among major players like Intel and Nvidia.
