3 ms·

I'm glad someone managed to save the data that we all payed for. My question is, how will this site stay relevant? The collection/analysis/monitoring of the cu

I'm glad someone managed to save the data that we all payed for. My question is, how will this site stay relevant? The collection/analysis/monitoring of the current situation is as important as historic data. Turning current data into historical data takes significant resources.

strictnein 3mo ago
Climate.gov was not the centralized and only storage spot for climate data. There's petabytes of it all over the place. You want data? https://www.noaa.gov/data https://www.noaa.gov/data or https://api.weather.gov/ https://api.weather.gov/ or https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/climate-data https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/climate-data are a good place to start.
- imoverclocked 3mo ago
  That only makes my question even more applicable... just with a wider scope. As for your question: I personally don't want data, I want a service backed by sound data and expert validation+analysis.
  - cwmoore 3mo ago
    Sounds grand, but it is not in scope. Instead, each citizen has a volition and a voice and a vote—with exceptions, and at personal expense. And as a humanitarian with reservations, I say tax the bots for UBI.
    - mmooss 2mo ago
      > each citizen has a volition and a voice and a vote Each citizen can't evaluate climate data. Specialization is necessary.
      - budsniffer952 2mo ago
        Each citizen doesn't need to, only some citizens need be able to. Because the data is available. Not sure about you, but I'm glad we moved away from a system where an anointed cadre of people tell us what's what.
        Peaches4Rent 2mo ago
        No one will believe said citizen with expertise because they don't a have a degree. Every billionaire backed media circus will ridicule said citizen. Example: Gary Stevenson is an inequality expert with a masters in economics but people keep demanding where are the PhD grads with his opinion, which there are, but it's a statement to distract and discredit
        mmooss 2mo ago
        > Each citizen doesn't need to, only some citizens need be able to. > I'm glad we moved away from a system where an anointed cadre of people tell us what's what. Those 'some citizens' are the experts. The 'annointed cadre' thing is just undefined, meaningless BS. Do you think that, lacking expertise, you can distinguish real experts from fraud, valid ideas and facts from misinformation? You can't; the people who think they can, those are the suckers - the ones they target to manipulate.
  - krapp 3mo ago
    >As for your question: I personally don't want data, I want a service backed by sound data and expert validation+analysis. Don't expect to find it in the US.
mycall 3mo ago
YCombinator has enough smarts to figure this out.
- naturalmovement 3mo ago
  How can we use a bucket of mostly useless data to enrich ourselves by building more VC-funded apps? I'm asking the important questions.
  - Johnny_Bonk 3mo ago
    Why would you say it’s useless data?
    - ggm 3mo ago
      [flagged]
      - Johnny_Bonk 3mo ago
        Thanks for the clarification lol
      - naturalmovement 3mo ago
        Well your interpretation is both rude and wrong but I've learned to expect this level of hubris here.
        ggm 2mo ago
        What exactly was hubristic about the comment? A young account with "See you at the bottom of the thread where the cool people hang out." and "down weighted" as it's descriptor? I could go with ad hom. I accept rude. It was rude.
        janderson215 2mo ago
        dang has really his work cut out for him recently…hopefully he’s training a digital clone.
ordersofmag 3mo ago
The site wasn't (isn't) about the data. It's about articles that contextualize the data. The money raised has allowed them to stand up a new site with all the old articles (which truth be told were all still nominally accessible via the internet archive) and will help fund them to create new ones. So it will stay relevant by paying the people who in the past worked for NOAA to creation the content, to now create the content paid for by donation.

strictnein 3mo ago

Climate.gov was not the centralized and only storage spot for climate data. There's petabytes of it all over the place. You want data? https://www.noaa.gov/data https://www.noaa.gov/data or https://api.weather.gov/ https://api.weather.gov/ or https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/climate-data https://climatedataguide.ucar.edu/climate-data are a good place to start.

imoverclocked 3mo ago
That only makes my question even more applicable... just with a wider scope. As for your question: I personally don't want data, I want a service backed by sound data and expert validation+analysis.
- cwmoore 3mo ago
  Sounds grand, but it is not in scope. Instead, each citizen has a volition and a voice and a vote—with exceptions, and at personal expense. And as a humanitarian with reservations, I say tax the bots for UBI.
  - mmooss 2mo ago
    > each citizen has a volition and a voice and a vote Each citizen can't evaluate climate data. Specialization is necessary.
    - budsniffer952 2mo ago
      Each citizen doesn't need to, only some citizens need be able to. Because the data is available. Not sure about you, but I'm glad we moved away from a system where an anointed cadre of people tell us what's what.
      - Peaches4Rent 2mo ago
        No one will believe said citizen with expertise because they don't a have a degree. Every billionaire backed media circus will ridicule said citizen. Example: Gary Stevenson is an inequality expert with a masters in economics but people keep demanding where are the PhD grads with his opinion, which there are, but it's a statement to distract and discredit
      - mmooss 2mo ago
        > Each citizen doesn't need to, only some citizens need be able to. > I'm glad we moved away from a system where an anointed cadre of people tell us what's what. Those 'some citizens' are the experts. The 'annointed cadre' thing is just undefined, meaningless BS. Do you think that, lacking expertise, you can distinguish real experts from fraud, valid ideas and facts from misinformation? You can't; the people who think they can, those are the suckers - the ones they target to manipulate.
- krapp 3mo ago
  >As for your question: I personally don't want data, I want a service backed by sound data and expert validation+analysis. Don't expect to find it in the US.

mycall 3mo ago

YCombinator has enough smarts to figure this out.

naturalmovement 3mo ago
How can we use a bucket of mostly useless data to enrich ourselves by building more VC-funded apps? I'm asking the important questions.
- Johnny_Bonk 3mo ago
  Why would you say it’s useless data?
  - ggm 3mo ago
    [flagged]
    - Johnny_Bonk 3mo ago
      Thanks for the clarification lol
    - naturalmovement 3mo ago
      Well your interpretation is both rude and wrong but I've learned to expect this level of hubris here.
      - ggm 2mo ago
        What exactly was hubristic about the comment? A young account with "See you at the bottom of the thread where the cool people hang out." and "down weighted" as it's descriptor? I could go with ad hom. I accept rude. It was rude.
        janderson215 2mo ago
        dang has really his work cut out for him recently…hopefully he’s training a digital clone.

ordersofmag 3mo ago

The site wasn't (isn't) about the data. It's about articles that contextualize the data. The money raised has allowed them to stand up a new site with all the old articles (which truth be told were all still nominally accessible via the internet archive) and will help fund them to create new ones. So it will stay relevant by paying the people who in the past worked for NOAA to creation the content, to now create the content paid for by donation.