Demis: "I have a new amazing breakthrough"
Sundar: "Great! We really need a answer to Sol and Fable"
Demis: "They are completely owned in typhoon forecasting"
It could save thousands of lives because people can be evacuated if you can predict a few hours or a day further ahead, or the path more accurately. You can save some damage by moving ships and vehicles.
But you can't evacuate buildings or infrastructure.
I can think of 10 examples how one could make money with fable. With WeatherNext? Only 10 examples of preventing costs.
Taking this, maybe naive, thought further, profits have no upper limit (except resources) while costs can only save so much?
Here's a selection from Typhoon Dolphin, currently sitting off the east coast of China.
Dolphin continues its slow, trochoidal Z motion, generally heading westward deeper into the East China Sea. Over the past 12 hours, the system completed another cyclonic loop and has decelerated, exhibiting continued meandering prior to establishing a sustained westward track.
The erratic motion witnessed over the past two days is attributable to a weak steering environment produced by a break in the subtropical ridge 2 over Korea, combined with the dynamics where the inner core is cocooned within a much larger parent circulation.
While the general steering pattern is weak, a mesoscale deep-layer ridge is seen building over southern Japan.
Here's Chan-hom, which threatens to make my birthday a windy day here in northern Japan.
Intensity guidance is in good agreement overall. However, the JTWC forecast is placed lower than all the guidance save for Google DeepMind over the next 36 hours, before joining the consensus envelope (which peaks at 95 km/h (50 knots) at 60 hours) through the remainder of the forecast.
Is there a basic/freemium resource for past events? Mostly just very coarse spatial/temporal maps of past events
What's hard is predicting details, like exactly where it will rain, what the slope of the beach is today (many people don't even know this changes drastically daily and why it is important), wave height, ocean depth today where people swim, water temperature, shorebreak, and knowing with certainty when rain becomes ice/sleet/snow and what routes will be affected, accurate wind speed, accurate temperature throughout different parts of the region, and what the weather next week will be.
We can't do any of those things with conventional equipment, but we can with training data and algorithms. So I'm very excited about the role of algorithmic prediction in weather, but not for the kind we already know how to forecast (without AI) but being able to glean useful insights that matter to people who live, work and play in the weather.
Crazy
Also crazy.
Seems important to understand why something does what it does, in the very least to know when it might not?
I do think it's possible that thorough exploration of the data that do exist can yield broader patterns that apply to many regions, but earthquake behavior has a lot of complexities and different fault systems may behave differently.
A lot of the hope is for coupling physical simulators to ML and the existing datasets to better understand the physics and then work from there, but this is typically cutting-edge HPC work, which limits the pace of research and the number of researchers.
But hey let's all keep shitting on Google because their coding agent is slightly worse than SOTA.
Reminder, we can do two or even more things. In fact, we can even simultaneously hold contradictory opinions.
I say this because it seems that earlier announcements where industrial deep neural nets "outperformed NOAA" likely encouraged the slash-and-burn Trump administration in its gutting of critical activities and centers of expertise at NOAA. The impression that industry can predict weather better than the government agencies totally misses that the industrial models utterly rely on government data for inputs. In fact, almost all weather reports you see---weather.com, TV, etc.---are just lightly repackaged products that NOAA provides for free on weather.gov (which you can access for free without ads).
> The model was co-trained on two distinct data modalities: global weather dynamics and expert-curated historical cyclone observations. By training end-to-end on nearly 20 terabytes of global atmospheric data and the historical IBTrACS database spanning nearly 5,000 historical storms, the model learns complex atmospheric patterns and how to model extreme weather.
Obviously the technology I'm talking about would involve the planes going into the cyclone so plane can go faster.
First, it reinforces that you want methods that get better with more data. It emphasizes that the current approach cannot improve based on historic data - that’s the opportunity that ML based approaches exploit.
Second, it highlights that mature legacy solutions are tough competitors. They benefit from extensive tuning and real world feedback. Even when you have a genuinely better approach, it will take meaningful time & effort to achieve the current standard.
Patience and solid long term strategy are needed to make progress in these situations. You need confidence that your approach will win long term, backed by enough money & time to prove yourself correct.