3 ms·

What could this have possibly cost? $10 a day worldwide? Pathetic.

lurk2 2y ago
I have a hard time believing a service like this wouldn't have employed at least one person full time. There is no way it cost anywhere remotely in the neighborhood of $10 a day.
- the_sleaze_ 2y ago
  This is an absolutely paltry change in light of other avenues to recoup revenue. And even if it were not, the way to change these systems is not to delete them but to restructure their incentives. However. Let's not kid ourselves that this program probably cost upwards of several million dollars. - Wired cut my access just before I was able to cite, but someone said the program cost "just tens of thousands of dollars a year, because equipment had already been purchased". The cost of procure install and maintenance I would imagine was wildly excessive.
  - lurk2 2y ago
    I don't disagree that cutting the program seems shortsighted. The issue I took with the grandparent comment is that it was simply uninformed. > Let's not kid ourselves that this program probably cost upwards of several million dollars. That's completely within the realm of possibility. I'd be surprised if you could set up any program at a federal level with less funding than that. 2 million dollars is a 25 man team if salaries and overhead are $80,000 per head. I really have no insight into what these kinds of programs cost, but I guarantee there is no way you're standing up servers in 100+ embassies for $10 a day. > Wired cut my access just before I was able to cite This is the same as not citing a source at all. Another user commented [0] that each of these servers cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $180,000 to $250,000 just to set up. [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43276805 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43276805
    - the_sleaze_ 2y ago
      > This is the same as not citing a source at all Maybe. I churn out solutions and designs based on fragmented tickets and hearsay user feedback all day long.
- scubadude 2y ago
  So someone got a job from it. They paid income tax, spent their salary at the local stores, which paid other people's salaries who paid income tax and spend their salary at the local stores. Why is this a problem. Reducing all this employment reduces money flowing around the economy (a factor in the Great Depression).
- DidYaWipe 2y ago
  Obviously I'm not including the original cost of the equipment and installation. I'm talking about transmitting the data. The story claims that the equipment will continue to run and the data will be collected; the complained-about cost is that of "the network." I imagine public Internet or Starlink would suffice to upload daily readings. But sure, that's speculation from someone who knows nothing about how it works.
  - aqueueaqueue 2y ago
    Politicians misusing a technical term. I doubt they mean the literal network interface cards and broadband bill. Even if they did it is more than $10. They mean the operation as a service with a human to troubleshoot. If not, why isn't tailscale free for everyone?
  - lurk2 2y ago
    > Obviously I'm not including the original cost of the equipment and installation The costs of this equipment get amortized for the duration of the equipment's useful life, so you can't just throw that away. Even if we do though, $10 is still too low of an estimate. For sake of argument, let's assume there was one guy running the entire network, part time, for half an hour per day. He will at minimum be making $30 an hour, add another %25 on top of that to account for overhead costs, so $37.50. $37.50 / 2 = $18.75. We're already over your threshold. If other estimates that this equipment is in the realm of $200,000 per node to set up (that's presumably not just the cost of the server and other equipment but also the cost of delivering the equipment and standing it all up in the embassy), assuming 100 nodes you're talking about a $200,000,000 program just in capital costs. Amortized over a 10 year life span, assuming linear depreciation, the amortization costs alone are $3,650 per day, and that isn't including maintenance.
    - DidYaWipe 2y ago
      I think the article states that the equipment will continue to be operating; so its cost (and presumably those of its operators) isn't changing, and thus can be ignored when evaluating this service cut. And yes, $10 is hyperbole, but we have AWOS (automatic weather observation systems) at airports all over the USA. I wonder how much it costs to transmit data from those.
mc32 2y ago
Good sensors are not cheap, they need recalibration, the app needs to be continually maintained. Some entity probably has a stupendous contract to maintain it.
- defrost 2y ago
  From the reports I've read it would seem that the sensors remain and will likely be maintained .. it's the public display of the data via the internet that's been cut. By all means whittle the fat from a third party contract on data delivery .. the sensor maintainance part is likely tricky but not challenging and has a real cost far less than mean cost of an embassy security staffer, being the kind of thing that takes an hour or so a month at most (once setup and running). ( FWiW I maintained, coded aquisition for, wrote presentation layers, for high end professional multi channel geophysical instrumentation: gravity, magnetics, radiometrics, lidar, radar, barometrics, twin gps + base station, etc )
- vaidhy 2y ago
  It is so easy to assume the worst and corrupt outcome as if it were the most logical one.
- insane_dreamer 2y ago
  Aren't the embassies keeping the sensors? I'm quite sure embassy staff would want AQI for their own information, especially in cities where official numbers are dubious. My understanding is that it just won't be _shared_ anymore. And the _sharing_ can't cost much.
  - DidYaWipe 2y ago
    Exactly. That was my point in the first place. How much does transmitting what is probably a low volume of non-time-critical data cost on a daily basis?
    - insane_dreamer 2y ago
      Which is why this seems much more likely to be some ideological "ditch everything possibly related to "woke" climate change" (because only "woke" people care about air quality?) than an actual cost-cutting measure
viceconsole 2y ago
I worked in a US consulate in a country with bad air pollution and developed asthma for the first time in my life during my two year tour there. I've since left that country (and the job) but still suffer the effects of the exposure. I used both the State Department provided AQI numbers as well as the host country's numbers to plan when and whether to spend time outside. None of the reporting I've seen on the issue has investigated the cost of the program. On the subreddit for State Department Foreign Service Officers, which I still frequent, the most plausible estimates for the installation of this equipment at a single foreign post range from $180k to $250k, plus ongoing maintenance that would require flying in private contractors from the U.S. and putting them up in a 5 star hotel (in countries where you need this type of monitoring, hotels less than 5 stars generally don't meet Western standards). [1] There has to be some kind of middle path between take a chainsaw to anything that has the word "environment" in it, and spending the cost of four years at a private college to install equipment that is available off the shelf for a few hundred dollars. (Yes, I know consumer grade equipment won't cut it, there are major network security concerns, etc., but surely it could be done at 10x or 20x the cost of a consumer solution, not 500x). [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/foreignservice/comments/1j3owmk/comment/mg3bx44/ https://www.reddit.com/r/foreignservice/comments/1j3owmk/com...
aqueueaqueue 2y ago
While I agree are we gonna do that? It is like saying why does Twitter need so many people I can do that in a weekend.
- DidYaWipe 2y ago
  Twitter needs content moderation, for one thing... or at least it did when they pretended to care. I don't think we're worried about particle sniffers transmitting porn, but then again they do like to sniff particles...

I have a hard time believing a service like this wouldn't have employed at least one person full time. There is no way it cost anywhere remotely in the neighborhood of $10 a day.

the_sleaze_ 2y ago
This is an absolutely paltry change in light of other avenues to recoup revenue. And even if it were not, the way to change these systems is not to delete them but to restructure their incentives. However. Let's not kid ourselves that this program probably cost upwards of several million dollars. - Wired cut my access just before I was able to cite, but someone said the program cost "just tens of thousands of dollars a year, because equipment had already been purchased". The cost of procure install and maintenance I would imagine was wildly excessive.
- lurk2 2y ago
  I don't disagree that cutting the program seems shortsighted. The issue I took with the grandparent comment is that it was simply uninformed. > Let's not kid ourselves that this program probably cost upwards of several million dollars. That's completely within the realm of possibility. I'd be surprised if you could set up any program at a federal level with less funding than that. 2 million dollars is a 25 man team if salaries and overhead are $80,000 per head. I really have no insight into what these kinds of programs cost, but I guarantee there is no way you're standing up servers in 100+ embassies for $10 a day. > Wired cut my access just before I was able to cite This is the same as not citing a source at all. Another user commented [0] that each of these servers cost somewhere in the neighborhood of $180,000 to $250,000 just to set up. [0] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43276805 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43276805
  - the_sleaze_ 2y ago
    > This is the same as not citing a source at all Maybe. I churn out solutions and designs based on fragmented tickets and hearsay user feedback all day long.
scubadude 2y ago
So someone got a job from it. They paid income tax, spent their salary at the local stores, which paid other people's salaries who paid income tax and spend their salary at the local stores. Why is this a problem. Reducing all this employment reduces money flowing around the economy (a factor in the Great Depression).
DidYaWipe 2y ago
Obviously I'm not including the original cost of the equipment and installation. I'm talking about transmitting the data. The story claims that the equipment will continue to run and the data will be collected; the complained-about cost is that of "the network." I imagine public Internet or Starlink would suffice to upload daily readings. But sure, that's speculation from someone who knows nothing about how it works.
- aqueueaqueue 2y ago
  Politicians misusing a technical term. I doubt they mean the literal network interface cards and broadband bill. Even if they did it is more than $10. They mean the operation as a service with a human to troubleshoot. If not, why isn't tailscale free for everyone?
- lurk2 2y ago
  > Obviously I'm not including the original cost of the equipment and installation The costs of this equipment get amortized for the duration of the equipment's useful life, so you can't just throw that away. Even if we do though, $10 is still too low of an estimate. For sake of argument, let's assume there was one guy running the entire network, part time, for half an hour per day. He will at minimum be making $30 an hour, add another %25 on top of that to account for overhead costs, so $37.50. $37.50 / 2 = $18.75. We're already over your threshold. If other estimates that this equipment is in the realm of $200,000 per node to set up (that's presumably not just the cost of the server and other equipment but also the cost of delivering the equipment and standing it all up in the embassy), assuming 100 nodes you're talking about a $200,000,000 program just in capital costs. Amortized over a 10 year life span, assuming linear depreciation, the amortization costs alone are $3,650 per day, and that isn't including maintenance.
  - DidYaWipe 2y ago
    I think the article states that the equipment will continue to be operating; so its cost (and presumably those of its operators) isn't changing, and thus can be ignored when evaluating this service cut. And yes, $10 is hyperbole, but we have AWOS (automatic weather observation systems) at airports all over the USA. I wonder how much it costs to transmit data from those.

mc32 2y ago

Good sensors are not cheap, they need recalibration, the app needs to be continually maintained. Some entity probably has a stupendous contract to maintain it.

defrost 2y ago
From the reports I've read it would seem that the sensors remain and will likely be maintained .. it's the public display of the data via the internet that's been cut. By all means whittle the fat from a third party contract on data delivery .. the sensor maintainance part is likely tricky but not challenging and has a real cost far less than mean cost of an embassy security staffer, being the kind of thing that takes an hour or so a month at most (once setup and running). ( FWiW I maintained, coded aquisition for, wrote presentation layers, for high end professional multi channel geophysical instrumentation: gravity, magnetics, radiometrics, lidar, radar, barometrics, twin gps + base station, etc )
vaidhy 2y ago
It is so easy to assume the worst and corrupt outcome as if it were the most logical one.
insane_dreamer 2y ago
Aren't the embassies keeping the sensors? I'm quite sure embassy staff would want AQI for their own information, especially in cities where official numbers are dubious. My understanding is that it just won't be _shared_ anymore. And the _sharing_ can't cost much.
- DidYaWipe 2y ago
  Exactly. That was my point in the first place. How much does transmitting what is probably a low volume of non-time-critical data cost on a daily basis?
  - insane_dreamer 2y ago
    Which is why this seems much more likely to be some ideological "ditch everything possibly related to "woke" climate change" (because only "woke" people care about air quality?) than an actual cost-cutting measure

viceconsole 2y ago

I worked in a US consulate in a country with bad air pollution and developed asthma for the first time in my life during my two year tour there. I've since left that country (and the job) but still suffer the effects of the exposure. I used both the State Department provided AQI numbers as well as the host country's numbers to plan when and whether to spend time outside. None of the reporting I've seen on the issue has investigated the cost of the program. On the subreddit for State Department Foreign Service Officers, which I still frequent, the most plausible estimates for the installation of this equipment at a single foreign post range from $180k to $250k, plus ongoing maintenance that would require flying in private contractors from the U.S. and putting them up in a 5 star hotel (in countries where you need this type of monitoring, hotels less than 5 stars generally don't meet Western standards). [1] There has to be some kind of middle path between take a chainsaw to anything that has the word "environment" in it, and spending the cost of four years at a private college to install equipment that is available off the shelf for a few hundred dollars. (Yes, I know consumer grade equipment won't cut it, there are major network security concerns, etc., but surely it could be done at 10x or 20x the cost of a consumer solution, not 500x). [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/foreignservice/comments/1j3owmk/comment/mg3bx44/ https://www.reddit.com/r/foreignservice/comments/1j3owmk/com...

aqueueaqueue 2y ago

While I agree are we gonna do that? It is like saying why does Twitter need so many people I can do that in a weekend.

DidYaWipe 2y ago
Twitter needs content moderation, for one thing... or at least it did when they pretended to care. I don't think we're worried about particle sniffers transmitting porn, but then again they do like to sniff particles...