2 Burst results for "Ron Watt"
"ron watt" Discussed on This Week in Tech
"You know, you need this. You've got to have it. The nudge act, I like to call it the new Jack. This is a new bill introduced by senator Klobuchar. That might actually be another one of those headwinds blowing against Facebook. The social media nudge act, which is sponsored by senator Klobuchar and Cynthia Loomis of Wyoming. Is kind of interesting. I might say kooky. It would direct the national science foundation and the national Academy of Sciences engineering and medicine. To study, quote, content neutral ways to slow down the spread of misinformation. The FTC would get the recommendations, codify them, mandate that Facebook and Twitter and other social media platforms put them into practice. Is it even conceivable that the NSF and the national Academy of Sciences engineering and medicine they Sam could come up with best practices to add friction to content sharing online that would make any sense at all? This makes me very mad. Let me tell you why. Yes. Good. Because in 2014, so this is 8 years ago. Now, 2013, sorry. I know where you're going. I know exactly where you're going with this. In 2013, I had more than one meeting at State Department with some folks, some higher level folks and lower level folks. And I said, hey, there's this Twitter thing, and there's misinformation bots. And here's what it bought is. And here's what a botnet is. And here's how some of this stuff works. And this is probably going to be sometime soon. Channel for misinformation. And that's something you ought to be paying attention to. And nobody cared. I think I'm a pretty effective communicator. And I failed repeatedly to get anybody at all excited about the coming onslaught of misinformation. And also ways for us to use to think through how on Twitter and Facebook botnets might pop up and how they would work. So I don't know. I think it's like 2022 and I feel like everybody's super freaking late to the party on this one. And it makes me really upset. I thought you were going to talk about the other thing that makes you really a set, which is the abandonment of the U.S. office of technology assessment. Well, there's that. Listen, we don't have a list. It's a long list of things. The piss Amy off. There is, I think senator Klobuchar is great. I think she's her heart is in the right place. But I also think what the hell has everybody been doing. Yeah, so I know I was not the only one shopping the surround the hill. We don't have an OSTP office of or we don't have a, oh my God, so many acronyms. We don't have the office of tech assessment. The OSTP finally has a new person in charge, but we just kick the can down the road too many times. So I don't know. Does the office producer hope? And technology policy kind of take the place of the old office of the now. OST was supposed to advise Congress. It was supposed to be like the GAO, a nonpartisan technology group of technology experts that would help Congress understand these difficult issues. Right. So I'm actually a fellow at the GAO on foresight, but the GAO's mandate is about auditing. It's not about it's not really about foresight. But it's not partisan, right? It's supposed to be a trusting and trusted authority that is. To grind in other words. Correct. Yes, no, but everybody else has an extra credit with them because their auditors. Nobody wants. So they are doing work and they're trying to become a central hub for foresight, but like nobody wants GAO coming knocking on the door and saying, hey, let's talk about your long-term plans. Nobody wants to deal with auditing. The officer technology assessment was the group that was responsible for doing research without politics involved on thorny areas over long periods of time and when they were around, they produced a lot of terrific research. We are in this situation in we are highly polarized, did you see this the times late last night published maybe Paris saw this. They think they know one of the originators of QAnon? Oh. They know the two originators of QAnon, which I believe has. Is it the father of one of them is no? One of them is one of them is running for one of them is Ron watt. Ron Watkins. We always thought it was him. Yeah. Yeah. Who has been in charge of kind of the platform behind it, but the other one is, I'm forgetting his name, but he was an original commoner and poster on the original forum. Watkins, according according to the documentary kind of took over the QAnon. Account when it moved off 4chan to 8chan. Watkins platform. I guess this other guy is the forerunner who and this is based on linguistic analysis. Interesting. But again, my point is, one of them is running for Congress. How do we it's inexcusable that we have gotten ourselves to this place? I think. I don't care what your political beliefs are, just the fact that politics is that the problem that I have is just that politics is so good. Ron Watkins is running for Congress. Oh my God. In Arizona. No, but this is the point. We are in a situation that was avoidable. I keep hoping you have a reason for not running for Congress in South Africa. I came that would put a makes it hard. It's a long distance relationship because no never work. I keep thinking that we're all going to come to our senses. The first mistake, Leah. A senses are long gone. And the people will just go, what? Oh, no, that was nuts. Pizzagate? What? No, no, no, no. We're not going to elect Ron Watkins. But Klobuchar, I think part of this legislation is in response. I don't think it's just about the platforms. It's about it's this sort of bigger picture thing. And again, how did we get to this point? I think we got to this point because we just didn't there wasn't a plan and we didn't have a process in place and I'm not saying we need to plan everything. But it would be good at least to run and develop some scenarios and then backwards from those. I think it's a big mistake to blame the platforms, honestly. I've come to round to this, they're just a place where people express themselves. The problem lies. In the people, not the platforms. I mean, this is the gun maker defense, correct. You have platforms that are incentivized to I guess you're right. Have people on them as much as possible, Facebook for a long time was built specifically to have its algorithm kind of feed you things that got more emoji reactions beyond just the like. And it ended up being that some of the emoji reactions that were weighted even higher ended up being things like the angry reaction. So of course, that ends up meaning in practice that people in their feeds are increasingly seeing content that makes them extremely emotional and negative way. And then generates comments calling that out and frankly, so do the news that as engagement. So the 24 hour news networks do exactly the same thing. Your local news at 11 does exactly. They know what drives engagement. They always do. It's a problem bigger than social networks. But I mean, the thing that I guess to circle back to original point of the thing that makes me angry about this nudge act or possible plan is that I don't think it's likely that a government agency reviewing these social networks to come up with a list of best practices for how to slow the sharing of content is ever going to result in any actionable change for these platforms. I mean, one, it seems unlikely that this bill would pass whatsoever given the amount of money in tech lobbying and the amount that companies like Facebook have to gain from something like this not being codified. But two, we just, we have been stunned over the last couple of years watching all of these congressional hearings relating to tech at just how little the people in power happened to seem to understand about how technology actually works, you know? I mean, this is how we get quotes like Mark Zuckerberg will you commit to ending finsta, which is what happened in a recent congressional hearing. I mean, it doesn't seem likely that this is going to produce something actionable and helpful. It almost feels like witchcraft like they're saying, well, we need to conduct a study. And they're going to come up with a magic silver bullet and then we're going to force these platforms to adhere to it. It's almost a way of saying we don't know what to do..
"ron watt" Discussed on Oil and Gas Startups Podcast
"In burying their head in the sand. Just a i i would. I can't. I can't across that without like hard. Actual real data like this just a bridge too far from me for chevron Like they do that. So let's let's. Let's get into details at so twenty blows out december tenth notice by a the ranch foreman four. Am on his way to work. Cattle calls and notifies the ernst response number that well is falling right. We believe mardi is one who found bs. Twenty flowing across the road chevron does not notify ashley chevron does not notify the railroad commission according to their own reports there is no mention of the railroad commission in any of the discussion upon us. What was happening and ics was stood up. They did amount and have merged response. They did clean it up. There was no. Ron watt remediation. Let let's assume the well just load for the five days reporting mardi truly caught it on the tenth of december. Listen by the fifteenth headed captain and secure it right in that five days and fourteen hundred barrels. That means the well would have flowed out eight thousand barrels. Give or take a bit bigger. The back truck report says something like five thousand barrels of water collected off the grounds still. It's a reasonably. There's three thousand barrels that were spilled at surface. There's line of dead mistreat six months later. That's very clearly indicated on the rancho. Does you come in and see the twenty location. Where's the groundwater monitoring wells for the three thousand barrels service whereas the site remediation plan for the three thousand barrels and restoration of mosquitoes that they put right six months later. I haven't seen a plan. There's still nothing documentation as twenty four. We're told were supposed to get a four or five monitoring well can't drill campaign drilled around the twenty four to determine the airline stand of the possible subsurface into the surface aquifer and also wounded the rossler and then there's a huge soil blowing up all the cliche disposal for all the messes that made on the twenty four work Remediation upliftment abandoned operation and and there were a lot spills like we headlined flow. We had we had failed. Leaks was mud matt's etcetera etcetera. So they got a lot of dirt work to do around locations well again. Not atypical component of our business. But again there has to be a form of planet to what live and how this done still haven't seen it now. I i worked. Chevron i worked for the business units i believe a lot of what they say is what the truly enacting what they do and i got to say. It's a really hard to look at the snow and say is this really sharp like this. This is not the chevron we deal with on a regular basis but remember this business. Unit is the environmental management company. That doesn't have to follow the soap's chevron corporate dnc the mc bu business unit out of midland has a has to fall with corporate guidance. I worked for our goals mexico. I've worked for more. see aberdeen. The we have global appease that have be violent executed according to global global standards. Emc doesn't have follow sharp over guts. Ep ex and be paid. It's kind of like seo. Exxon that's never been corporated. Exxon because actually open never meet exxon's for guidance on their well-designed sender documentations. How they do what they do. So emc is given somewhat about a leniency. Pass here on having to follow the strict chevron dnc corporate sob's. I i think if you look at it from outside chevron you say. Emc is thing as mcp you. But they're not the two totally different business. Units one works for the real estate company. One the drilling completions purpose. Then there is really hard to grasp that this circumstances because emc not because the way chevron dnc words. And that's what got me. A bit puzzled is that it is hard to grasp that chevron would act so differently than their other counterparts but the data that we have in front of us and their action plans and what they've submitted isn't following chevron four brigades so again there's a lot of very strange things about this. The fact that like i said earlier i was a bit ignorant in thinking that chevron was just discovering at is the first time soon across load in this. This field had surface expressions. Well no it's that the engineers and the people that were involved were just out on the twenty months previously. The wanna want is just right behind the also was in well-controlled and ironically couldn't get to the workover on that well because the road was flooded out from the estes twenty blowout so it's not like it's not like chevron internally didn't know this field was a disaster now i don't know how how you quantify that from their internal documentation without a massive amount of litigation discovery. But there's a part of justin. It really stinks. When you look at it and say we'll knew you had a dog. You sold off liability in this one came back Will then why didn't you just stuck. The bits wants to say the them eight you sold it took liability old. Well sister problems. Why would you take ownership of. Yeah i mean. I i don't disagree with you on that. I mean it seems to me like the easiest thing to you because this field is i mean. I don't remember the exact number of the production. But when i like that it's basically almost dead. Anyway i i just if i were in his shoes and if i thought i was creating this issue by my injection you know a. You'd probably shut that injection off in that field. You know i'd probably go back to chevron delight whatever. I paid you for this field. I'm online back. It's probably the only three million dollars or four million dollars. I don't know probably minimal amount of money in. Frankly if you shut the injection off. You'd probably whether there was other plugging issues. Whether there was future groundwater contamination issues that could occur. You would just never You'd never get there because you wouldn't be adding pressure into the reservoir with the injection and they weren't agreement that the first step is going to be the half get somebody off center. Whether it's chevron fits or roaf mission somebody to shut it in the injections and say does that have any effect on dissipating in the pressure in the energy is that second thing is and i and i don't disagree with you on this chris. That from ashley's point of view. It's about protecting from six hundred feet right. If you wanna leave the underground broaden a complete cluster. Fuck that that that's fine. He my guest right. It's not technically in her interest. As long as it doesn't contaminate above the salatto into the wrestler. She doesn't give a damn about the subsurface finishing because not great right because it does lead to risk potentially whether other wells but if it is truly contained in the dwell designs chrysler you could say okay but the problem is when you go look at the old gulf oil sixteen inch casing designed thinks that at one hundred fifty five at nine five eight. It's not isolated across fourteen hundred eight hundred fifty five if that pressure fields communicating through the through that interval near the sixteen inch designs. You've got the risk loss cross. Slow from fourteen. Seventy five enroll all the way up to one hundred fifty five feet. But i think we agree that that fourteen hundred interval is the pressure. That's is due to cross flow from a deeper zone injection right. I wouldn't disagree. It's it's hard to imagine anybody. Nobody legally permitted to dispose of water at the tansel unit. So if somebody is injecting his hansel petroleum violation of the railroad commission so on the permited wells. That are tactic. Aren't acting into the san andreas. Or they're injecting into the devonian or the know injecting into other other.