ES version is available. Content is displayed in original English for accuracy.
Advertisement
Advertisement
⚡ Community Insights
Discussion Sentiment
80% Positive
Analyzed from 1178 words in the discussion.
Trending Topics
#more#weather#models#data#less#interesting#forecasting#https#better#typhoon

Discussion (39 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews
First, it reinforces that you want methods that get better with more data. It emphasizes that the current approach cannot improve based on historic data - that’s the opportunity that ML based approaches exploit.
Second, it highlights that mature legacy solutions are tough competitors. They benefit from extensive tuning and real world feedback. Even when you have a genuinely better approach, it will take meaningful time & effort to achieve the current standard.
Patience and solid long term strategy are needed to make progress in these situations. You need confidence that your approach will win long term, backed by enough money & time to prove yourself correct.
Demis: "I have a new amazing breakthrough"
Sundar: "Great! We really need a answer to Sol and Fable"
Demis: "They are completely owned in typhoon forecasting"
Here's a selection from Typhoon Dolphin, currently sitting off the east coast of China.
https://zoom.earth/storms/dolphin-2026/Here's Chan-hom, which threatens to make my birthday a windy day here in northern Japan.
https://zoom.earth/storms/chan-hom-2026/1: https://www.tropicaltidbits.com/
Is there a basic/freemium resource for past events? Mostly just very coarse spatial/temporal maps of past events
Crazy
Also crazy.
Seems important to understand why something does what it does, in the very least to know when it might not?
But hey let's all keep shitting on Google because their coding agent is slightly worse than SOTA.
Reminder, we can do two or even more things. In fact, we can even simultaneously hold contradictory opinions.
I say this because it seems that earlier announcements where industrial deep neural nets "outperformed NOAA" likely encouraged the slash-and-burn Trump administration in its gutting of critical activities and centers of expertise at NOAA. The impression that industry can predict weather better than the government agencies totally misses that the industrial models utterly rely on government data for inputs. In fact, almost all weather reports you see---weather.com, TV, etc.---are just lightly repackaged products that NOAA provides for free on weather.gov (which you can access for free without ads).
Obviously the technology I'm talking about would involve the planes going into the cyclone so plane can go faster.