Live data from Hacker News

Announcing the Pollen API

cloud.google.com

81–88 of 88 posts

Re: Announcing the Pollen API

#81

I’m guessing this is a direct result of their acquisition of BreezoMeter: https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/breezometer

Yep, and the Breezometer homepage now redirects to Google’s map platform page (subpages still seem to work, such as https://www.breezometer.com/air-quality-map/air-quality/unit...) and they had previously announced plans to sunset the Breezometer app in September.

Breezometer is also the air quality data source for Apple Maps and I’m sure other weather apps too, so assuming the pricing is comparable there’s probably a decent business here just from existing customers.

Re: Announcing the Pollen API

#82
post #11

I’m a bit surprised to see a single geodata theme packaged as a whole “thing.” And goodness the marketing fluff is quite repetitive given they have so little to talk about. Call me jaded but it feels like someone’s really announcing, “I shipped something! Give me my promotion!” > Our Pollen API is based on a model that calculates the seasonality and daily amount of pollen grains on a 1x1 km2 grid in over 65 countries…

I'm disappointed as i thought they'd use actual sensors instead of guessing using old data.

If Google deployed a bunch of sensors of any type the headlines would certainly be "Google is now spying on the air!".

Google has put a air quality sensors in some of its Streetview cars (https://www.google.com/earth/outreach/special-projects/air-q...). Hopefully, they will do the same for Waymo vehicles.

Re: Announcing the Pollen API

#83
post #4

[flagged]

vitriolic comment voicing your own little issues that adds nothing to the conversation about the topic at hand

These aren’t my own issues! I don’t use Firebase or Bazel anymore. But thousands of developers do or need to.

How many developers are going to use the Pollen API, do you think?

Re: Announcing the Pollen API

#84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Threads on HN aren't expected to remain on-topic, especially top-level comments (like the one you're replying to). HN's content guidelines place no restriction on comments to be on-topic, let alone decide what on-topic is. 2. I see no vitriol in your parent comment. Sarcasm yes, but employing sarcasm alone does not make speech vitriolic. 3. You commented _about_ your parent, rathering than responding to the conten…

> HN's content guidelines place no restriction on comments to be on-topic, let alone decide what on-topic is. Do you really think there needs to be a guideline saying "comments should be on-topic"? Wouldn't you assume that based on both the guidelines and how we generally conduct ourselves in the comments? The guidelines don't say anything specifically about racism but surely you would agree that racist comments have…

Are you comparing my very reasonable comment to racism? Or… ?

Just because you think a comment isn’t relevant doesn’t mean others do.

Re: Announcing the Pollen API

#85
post #40

> According to the World Health Organization, up to ⅓ of the global population suffers from allergic rhinitis, Has anyone yet figured out why so many humans suffer from an allergy to many natural plants which we have lived around for millions of years? It looks like the first documented case of Hayfever was March 1819[1], and at the time it was considered a very unusual and rare affliction. When and why has it now be…

There was a very interesting discussion recently on this topic. [1] There are various hypothesis: * changes to gut microbiome composition due to modern diets and overuse of antibiotics * excessive cleanliness and hygiene. The "hygiene hypothesis" suggests that lack of exposure to diverse microbes leads to improperly trained immune systems * increased exposure to chemicals, plastics, and pollutants that may disrupt im…

Exposure to cigarette smoke was also considered a candidate or reason, when I was younger. I haven't kept up with the thinking on or about this, but I believe it's still considered valid.

Remember, a few decades ago, a lot of the "Western" world smoked, including in public spaces and around kids. As I understand it, a lot of the rest of the world has caught up and still does so. And the Western world isn't exactly rid of the behavior, either.

P.S. I wonder whether anyone's studied possible multiple-generation, genetically-communicated knock-on effects of this.

P.P.S. "Pollen" is also a Racket language based blogging and authoring tool or environment. A bit sorry to see the name become overloaded.

Re: Announcing the Pollen API

#86
post #75

> According to the World Health Organization, up to ⅓ of the global population suffers from allergic rhinitis, Has anyone yet figured out why so many humans suffer from an allergy to many natural plants which we have lived around for millions of years? It looks like the first documented case of Hayfever was March 1819[1], and at the time it was considered a very unusual and rare affliction. When and why has it now be…

> Has anyone yet figured out why so many humans suffer from an allergy to many natural plants which we have lived around for millions of years? For those of us in the Americas most of us aren't living in the same places our ancestors lived for millions of years and so are living around a different set of plants than humans evolved with. For example I've lived all my life in the western United States, about 30 years i…

> How many generations does a population have to live in a new area before they adapt sufficiently so that the native plants don't give them allergic rhinitis?

Assuming it is even hereditary, presumably it would also have to factor into reproductive selection (you mean runny noses aren't sexy?) for that to happen?

Re: Announcing the Pollen API

#87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Threads on HN aren't expected to remain on-topic, especially top-level comments (like the one you're replying to). HN's content guidelines place no restriction on comments to be on-topic, let alone decide what on-topic is. 2. I see no vitriol in your parent comment. Sarcasm yes, but employing sarcasm alone does not make speech vitriolic. 3. You commented _about_ your parent, rathering than responding to the conten…

> HN's content guidelines place no restriction on comments to be on-topic, let alone decide what on-topic is. Do you really think there needs to be a guideline saying "comments should be on-topic"? Wouldn't you assume that based on both the guidelines and how we generally conduct ourselves in the comments? The guidelines don't say anything specifically about racism but surely you would agree that racist comments have…

> Do you really think there needs to be a guideline saying "comments should be on-topic"?

Of course not. I thought the way I wrote made it very clear that I was championing the fact that there's no such rule. If you really misconstrued my comment as the twisted opposite of that, perhaps I need to learn to write better.

> Wouldn't you assume that based on ... the guidelines ...

Actually, no. I see nothing in the guidelines that even urge us to stay on-topic.

> ... and how we generally conduct ourselves in the comments?

Definitely, no. Comments on HN — especially toplevel comments — frequently fork and/or launch entirely new conversations. In fact, that is one of the reasons I enjoy reading HN. I always know, when I click on the comments of a link post, to not expect any discussion about what's contained in the link, because of how reliably often that happens.

----

> But despite all that, the guidelines do ask us to avoid generic tangents and to not post shallow dismissals. I'd say the comment at the top of this thread qualifies on both counts.

Maybe it does; maybe it doesn't. That's not the point. This is the point: shutting down a thread because someone thinks the conversation is not "on-topic" for the post.

Oh wait. Did you want to change the topic of conversation? Isn't that how we generally conduct ourselves in the comments? Do you now see what I mean?

----

> Now we're many messages deep here arguing about what belongs ...

No, "we" are not. You are. I am not engaging in this conversation that you are trying to start by going off on a generic tangent.

> ... and that itself is a violation of the most important guideline: this is boring to read.

I just didn't want the shallow dismissal that my parent was using to shut down discourse to become more commonplace on this forum. I _like_ HN for that kind of discourse. I learn more because of "off-topic" discussions. It is precisely because I do not want HN to become what my parent was advocating — all comments shall stay on one topic only, that of the submission — that I replied. Because _that_ would be boring.

I am sorry you found my comment boring. I wasn't arguing to argue about what belongs here. I was defending the presence of sth I didn't believe was too boring to be allowed here. Of course, such writing can be boring to read. I tried to do what I could to make it less boring. But, as always, there's room for improvement.

Re: Announcing the Pollen API

#88
post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> HN's content guidelines place no restriction on comments to be on-topic, let alone decide what on-topic is. Do you really think there needs to be a guideline saying "comments should be on-topic"? Wouldn't you assume that based on both the guidelines and how we generally conduct ourselves in the comments? The guidelines don't say anything specifically about racism but surely you would agree that racist comments have…

Are you comparing my very reasonable comment to racism? Or… ? Just because you think a comment isn’t relevant doesn’t mean others do.

> Are you comparing my very reasonable comment to racism? Or… ?

No, they're just providing a neutral example. Neutral towards you and them, that is.

Post reply on HN