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

51–60 of 71 posts

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

#51

Post by krisoft »

tartoran wrote: post #33
krisoft wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Weather balloons are a recurring cost. What do you think taxes are? Do we pay taxes once and that's it?

Huslage said “I ALREADY paid for the weather balloons and they are no longer being launched.”

Past tense. You could say that you have already paid for something where the cost is largely up-front. Like for example you could say it for the aircraft carriers. Imagine that (ad absurdum) the administration would want to sink all aircraft carriers. Then you, or Huslage, could rightfully say “I have already paid for the aircraft carriers…”. You could complain that your tax dollars are being wasted by sinking them.

But with a recurring cost like weather balloons the same sentence doesn’t make sense. There you could say “I have been paying for those balloons” (for which presumably you got the data you wanted from the balloons). Once they no longer are launching them, you are no longer paying for them. (Modulo some stock remaining on the warehouse shelves I guess. But that is basically a rounding error in a government budget.)

What Huslage said makes sense if they think of the weather balloons as a large up-front cost, like an aircraft carrier. Huslage already paid for them and now they won’t be used anymore! What a waste! But in reality it is more like a recurring cost. Like for example if the pentagon had a Netflix account and now they are canceling it. You wouldn’t say “I ALREADY paid for the netflix account”. You haven’t “already paid” for it. You were paying for it up until now, and you won’t be paying for it from now on.

There are many great reasons for why it is a good idea for the government to keep launching weather balloons. Huslage “already paid for it” is not one of those great reasons. It demonstrates a misunderstanding of how weather balloons work.

But do change my mind. Why do you think it matters that taxes too are recurring? How does that make the weather balloons “already paid”?

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

#52

Post by Daviey »

andrewstuart wrote: post #32

What happens to weather balloons do they just drop out of the sky? Do they ever hit anyone? Are they just garbage the gets left on the ground?

Yes, I found one in a car park many years ago. Disposed of the balloon, but gave the radar reflector to the local school geography department.

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

#53

Post by Daviey »

huslage wrote: post #28
bigveech wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. Th…

It largely depends if it is bought by a public service under a license that allows public release, surely?

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

#56

Post by mlinhares »

wturner wrote: post #5
xnx wrote: post #3

Good timing "At least 10 sites have suspended or limited weather balloon launches because of the Trump administration’s cuts to the National Weather Service." https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/weather-balloon...

Their agenda is to intentionally make government dysfunctional as a catalyst to privatize everything. It's working.

Problem is there is no money in this for the private market, so the government will have to pay 10x more to get a patchwork of private entities to do the work the government was already doing.

If we don't get these people out and revert all they did there won't be much of a future for this country that isn't becoming another failed economy with a few places being a little bit better than the others. The US will be a third world country soon.

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

#58

Post by fastball »

mlinhares wrote: post #56
wturner wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their agenda is to intentionally make government dysfunctional as a catalyst to privatize everything. It's working.

Problem is there is no money in this for the private market, so the government will have to pay 10x more to get a patchwork of private entities to do the work the government was already doing. If we don't get these people out and revert all they did there won't be much of a future for this country that isn't becoming another failed economy with a few places being a little bit better than the others. The US will be a…

Yes, the US Federal Government, famous for doing things efficiently and cheaply when no private contractors are involved.

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

#60

Post by fastball »

jmcgough wrote: post #36
mcdow wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see why that might be frustrating. What about this problem makes it the best fit for the government to handle? Is it prone to natural monopoly? There are lots of things that the government can handle and shouldn’t. Just because the government handled something in the past isn’t a reason in-and-of-itself for it to resume handling it in the future. I’m genuinely curious as I am ignorant of the space.

What private industry has been pushing for for decades is privatizing weather data so they can sell it at a profit. But weather information is a huge public good and has been provided by the federal government for decades. Privatizing it adds more costs to public research, and means that people who don't have money to spend on weather forecasting - those living in poverty and most at risk when it comes to life-threat…

"People will likely die" is a pretty bold claim. Do you have a citation that deaths were avoided because poor people saw a weather report?
Post reply on HN