Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Sorcerer (YC S24) raises $3.9M to launch more weather balloons

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 71 posts

Re: Sorcerer (YC S24) raises $3.9M to launch more weather balloons

#21

Post by Workaccount2 »

jaccola wrote: post #9
huslage wrote: post #8

This is an anti-pattern. Doing the work that the government should be (and was) doing and then selling back the data to them or others when the data should be (and was) public domain is absolutely terrible for society. No one should fund this.

By this logic anything could become government run but never transition from government run to privately run, creating a ratcheting mechanism that would eventually lead to ~everything being government run! The pro case for privatisation (that I happen to believe in) is: you were paying for it anyway, via your tax dollars, having it private leads to competition and stronger incentives to improve/cut costs meaning it w…

There is a key difference, privatization means a flat cost, whereas public means an income based cost.

About 30% of Americans get (NWS) weather data for free. They pay no income tax yet receive the same level of public benefits. On the other hand, a handful of Americans pay millions for weather data, and receive the same thing as those who paid nothing.

For a private service though, it would just be $20/mo or whatever for everyone.

Re: Sorcerer (YC S24) raises $3.9M to launch more weather balloons

#22

Post by [deleted] »

thrance wrote: post #12
jaccola wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic anything could become government run but never transition from government run to privately run, creating a ratcheting mechanism that would eventually lead to ~everything being government run! The pro case for privatisation (that I happen to believe in) is: you were paying for it anyway, via your tax dollars, having it private leads to competition and stronger incentives to improve/cut costs meaning it w…

How's that working out for public health in the states? Weather reporting is a common good. It worked very well for pennies and benefitted the economy greatly. Why privatize it?

[deleted]

Re: Sorcerer (YC S24) raises $3.9M to launch more weather balloons

#23

Post by krisoft »

huslage wrote: post #11
jaccola wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic anything could become government run but never transition from government run to privately run, creating a ratcheting mechanism that would eventually lead to ~everything being government run! The pro case for privatisation (that I happen to believe in) is: you were paying for it anyway, via your tax dollars, having it private leads to competition and stronger incentives to improve/cut costs meaning it w…

You are oversimplifying here. I ALREADY paid for the weather balloons and they are no longer being launched. This is not privatization in the way that you seem to think it is. This is explicitly against the will of the people. I'm fine if they want to make new weather balloons and sell them to people to launch for whatever reason they want. Selling what by law should be public data is anathema.

Weather balloons are a recurring cost. It is not like you launch a weather balloon once and it provides data forever. You need to launch new balloons once the ones previously launched land. (This is typically a very short amount of time. Days not weeks.)

It is not like this company is going to take over the management of weather balloons you have already paid for. Or I don't know how you imagine this is going to work.

> This is not privatization in the way that you seem to think it is.

Can you tell me more about how you think it is?

Re: Sorcerer (YC S24) raises $3.9M to launch more weather balloons

#24

Post by CGMthrowaway »

huslage wrote: post #11
jaccola wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic anything could become government run but never transition from government run to privately run, creating a ratcheting mechanism that would eventually lead to ~everything being government run! The pro case for privatisation (that I happen to believe in) is: you were paying for it anyway, via your tax dollars, having it private leads to competition and stronger incentives to improve/cut costs meaning it w…

You are oversimplifying here. I ALREADY paid for the weather balloons and they are no longer being launched. This is not privatization in the way that you seem to think it is. This is explicitly against the will of the people. I'm fine if they want to make new weather balloons and sell them to people to launch for whatever reason they want. Selling what by law should be public data is anathema.

You are also simplifying. You didn't pay for anything. You were taxed, and representatives selected in accordance with a social contract between government and the people (the Constitution), apportioned and spent (or didn't spend) the money.

Re: Sorcerer (YC S24) raises $3.9M to launch more weather balloons

#25

Post by huslage »

CGMthrowaway wrote: post #24
huslage wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are oversimplifying here. I ALREADY paid for the weather balloons and they are no longer being launched. This is not privatization in the way that you seem to think it is. This is explicitly against the will of the people. I'm fine if they want to make new weather balloons and sell them to people to launch for whatever reason they want. Selling what by law should be public data is anathema.

You are also simplifying. You didn't pay for anything. You were taxed, and representatives selected in accordance with a social contract between government and the people (the Constitution), apportioned and spent (or didn't spend) the money.

That explicitly has not happened in this instance. Don't tell me how democracy works.

Re: Sorcerer (YC S24) raises $3.9M to launch more weather balloons

#26

Post by huslage »

krisoft wrote: post #23
huslage wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are oversimplifying here. I ALREADY paid for the weather balloons and they are no longer being launched. This is not privatization in the way that you seem to think it is. This is explicitly against the will of the people. I'm fine if they want to make new weather balloons and sell them to people to launch for whatever reason they want. Selling what by law should be public data is anathema.

Weather balloons are a recurring cost. It is not like you launch a weather balloon once and it provides data forever. You need to launch new balloons once the ones previously launched land. (This is typically a very short amount of time. Days not weeks.) It is not like this company is going to take over the management of weather balloons you have already paid for. Or I don't know how you imagine this is going to work…

I imagine the government is going to start launching weather balloons again after they get sued for illegally firing the staff that's supposed to do it.

Re: Sorcerer (YC S24) raises $3.9M to launch more weather balloons

#27

Post by bigveech »

huslage wrote: post #8

This is an anti-pattern. Doing the work that the government should be (and was) doing and then selling back the data to them or others when the data should be (and was) public domain is absolutely terrible for society. No one should fund this.

Just to put it in perspective: it costs $300–500 to produce a single atmospheric profile with current balloon infrastructure. The U.S. launches ~180 a day—that’s at least $54K daily. Not exactly “pennies.” :)

And the government already buys the helium, radiosondes, and ground systems from private vendors—so the money’s going to private industry anyway. It’s just inefficient.

With 50 of our systems doing 4 profiles a day (which is no where close to max scale), you get the same volume of data for way less. And on top of that, because we reach remote and oceanic areas that aren’t being measured today, the data is also more valuable!

Also, the data you’re referring to isn’t inherently public domain. It becomes public when the government buys it and redistributes it. That’s true whether they pay for the infrastructure themselves or buy the data directly from a company.

Re: Sorcerer (YC S24) raises $3.9M to launch more weather balloons

#28

Post by huslage »

bigveech wrote: post #27
huslage wrote: post #8

This is an anti-pattern. Doing the work that the government should be (and was) doing and then selling back the data to them or others when the data should be (and was) public domain is absolutely terrible for society. No one should fund this.

Just to put it in perspective: it costs $300–500 to produce a single atmospheric profile with current balloon infrastructure. The U.S. launches ~180 a day—that’s at least $54K daily. Not exactly “pennies.” :) And the government already buys the helium, radiosondes, and ground systems from private vendors—so the money’s going to private industry anyway. It’s just inefficient. With 50 of our systems doing 4 profiles a…

I'm glad you have come up with something more efficient. The problem has nothing to do with efficiency. You are welcome to make a government contract to sell them equipment or data as you wish.

My problem is with baseline services that have already been stopped that you claim to want to replace. This data feeds all of our weather models and should be done with existing infrastructure until congress changes things. The data must be freely available.

The fact is that the data is available for anyone anywhere and is a valuable resource for scientists everywhere. Your current goals might be laudable right now, but that is not going to be the case when you have to pay back an investor 100x in 5 years. You will do everything you can to lock that data up and make it as expensive as you can. You will have no choice.

Re: Sorcerer (YC S24) raises $3.9M to launch more weather balloons

#29

Post by gusgus01 »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #21
jaccola wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By this logic anything could become government run but never transition from government run to privately run, creating a ratcheting mechanism that would eventually lead to ~everything being government run! The pro case for privatisation (that I happen to believe in) is: you were paying for it anyway, via your tax dollars, having it private leads to competition and stronger incentives to improve/cut costs meaning it w…

There is a key difference, privatization means a flat cost, whereas public means an income based cost. About 30% of Americans get (NWS) weather data for free. They pay no income tax yet receive the same level of public benefits. On the other hand, a handful of Americans pay millions for weather data, and receive the same thing as those who paid nothing. For a private service though, it would just be $20/mo or whateve…

Where did you get 30% from? I'm just curious since NWS data is widely used as a source for creating weather forecasts, which if I had to guess near 100% of people use in one way, shape, or form. I think Google uses it, so anyone with an Android phone is one click away from a forecast using the data.

On the matter of taxes being proportional to income, I'm not going to argue about progressive taxation or any moralistic standpoint of proportional taxation. From purely a utility standpoint, those handful of people probably reap way more value from that NWS data being available. The richest people (those paying the millions for NWS) usually are that rich from the labor of others, and those labor forces all get value from the data to help plan their days, including getting to the workplace safely. Another even more direct use for the economy would be routing of trucks through snowy passes, or planning for large construction companies.

Re: Sorcerer (YC S24) raises $3.9M to launch more weather balloons

#30

Post by CGMthrowaway »

huslage wrote: post #25
CGMthrowaway wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are also simplifying. You didn't pay for anything. You were taxed, and representatives selected in accordance with a social contract between government and the people (the Constitution), apportioned and spent (or didn't spend) the money.

That explicitly has not happened in this instance. Don't tell me how democracy works.

Which part? And I wasn't describing democracy
Post reply on HN