[HN Gopher] AccuWeather to discontinue free access to Core Weath...
___________________________________________________________________
AccuWeather to discontinue free access to Core Weather API
Author : TerribleTurnout
Score : 212 points
Date : 2025-07-23 19:26 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (developer.accuweather.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (developer.accuweather.com)
| otterley wrote:
| NWS's APIs are still free of charge:
| https://www.weather.gov/documentation/services-web-api
| macintux wrote:
| For now. There's a pretty decent chance that AccuWeather is
| discontinuing this in anticipation that the NWS is going to be
| sabotaged.
|
| Update: https://gizmodo.com/republicans-project-2025-would-end-
| free-...
| exe34 wrote:
| > "These form a colossal operation that has become one of the
| main drivers of the climate change alarm industry and, as
| such, is harmful to future U.S. prosperity," Project 2025
| says. "This industry's mission emphasis on prediction and
| management seems designed around the fatal conceit of
| planning for the unplannable."
|
| Shoot the messenger and bury your head in the sand!
| evilkorn wrote:
| Don't look up
| michaelsshaw wrote:
| It's funny that they call it planning for the unplannable
| when the NWS have given extremely specific instructions on
| what to do in all sorts of inclement situations. This
| passage was just baffling.
| ndiddy wrote:
| Meanwhile China has reached their 2030 goal of peak CO2
| emissions 5 years early by rapidly deploying
| solar/wind/nuclear and manufacturing cheap EVs for personal
| transport. I wish the US was capable of working towards and
| achieving large-scale societal goals like that.
| rjbwork wrote:
| We are. Just look at the current administration. What
| they've accomplished in just 6 months is staggering.
|
| We've just let the wrong sort of people control our
| communication infrastructure, set the messages
| disseminated by that infrastructure, and take power in a
| multi-pronged attack.
|
| There's no reason there couldn't have been an FDR-esque
| strongman driven emulation of China's approach.
|
| Instead we're blowing up the national debt, cutting
| services, dismantling soft power, destroying our
| scientific and academic infrastructure, and expanding the
| military.
| Spoom wrote:
| Arguably Americans voted for all of that, though. It was
| laid out in a document that was public years in advance.
| rjbwork wrote:
| Well, there are varying opinions on that. I agree with
| you somewhat, but many that "voted for that" have said
| otherwise and either 1) didn't ever hear about said
| document or 2) actively dismissed it as "fake news" or 3)
| believed the president when he said he'd never heard of
| it and it wouldn't be his agenda.
| evan_ wrote:
| Trump himself, and his spokespeople, all publicly denied
| that they had anything to do with Project 2025 ahead of
| the election. It was a laughable lie, the only people who
| believed it were apparently the media, who reported it as
| fact.
| exe34 wrote:
| And the numpties who voted for him.
| LeifCarrotson wrote:
| It's always easier to tear things down than it is to
| build things, the past 6 months are staggering but not
| because they're impressive.
| sunflowerfly wrote:
| We once were. We built canals, a massive railroad system,
| then our interstate system. Likely a sign of our slow
| decline to a has been country.
|
| Today we should be building subways, a hub and spoke high
| speed rail system, and an automated hub and spoke freight
| system that uses trucks only for first and last mile. And
| maybe a tunnel at the Bering straight.
| geoka9 wrote:
| > And maybe a tunnel at the Bering straight.
|
| Interesting idea. Why?
| ryandrake wrote:
| None of it even makes any sense. So, our national ability
| to predict whether it's going to rain this weekend,
| anywhere in the country, is "climate change alarm?"
| exe34 wrote:
| I don't think they're educated enough to know the
| difference.
| sjsdaiuasgdia wrote:
| It's one of those troublesome "reality has a left wing
| bias" problems. If you let the facts express themselves
| too much, the gap between truth and propaganda becomes
| too noticeable. Can't have that.
| krferriter wrote:
| They're just evil and want to maximize short term profit
| with no consideration of side effects or impacts to
| future trajectories, and their ideas are so stupid and
| shortsighted they don't even maximize short term profits
| either.
| krapp wrote:
| You're talking about an administration voted in by people
| who attack meteorologists because they think they cause
| hurricanes[0], and a President who has called climate
| change a Chinese hoax.
|
| This is a perfectly rational set of policies as far as
| these people are concerned. How else are we going to stop
| the Jewish space lasers?
|
| [0]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/14/us/meteorologists-
| threats...
| throw0101b wrote:
| Yeah:
|
| > _" The Pentagon ... announced that we are eliminating
| woke climate change programs and initiatives inconsistent
| with our core warfighting mission," [Chief Pentagon
| Spokesman Sean Parnell] said._
|
| * https://www.defense.gov/News/News-
| Stories/Article/Article/41...
|
| See also "Pentagon Starts Purging Climate Change Measures":
|
| * https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/trump-
| pentagon-pu...
|
| But from 2021 (during Biden), "Climate change is a risk to
| national security, the Pentagon says"
|
| * https://www.npr.org/2021/10/26/1049222045/the-pentagon-
| says-...
| input_sh wrote:
| For context, this is something AccuWeather in particular
| lobbied for for decades. This was their goal in particular.
|
| In 2005: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Weather_Ser
| vice_Dutie...
|
| > In the wake of the bill's introduction, Santorum was
| accused of political impropriety and influence peddling
| because Joel Myers, the head of Pennsylvania-based
| AccuWeather and one of Santorum's constituents, was also a
| Santorum campaign contributor.
|
| In 2017, when Berry Myers (AKA the CEO of AccuWeather) was
| nominated to head the NOAA, but was never confirmed into
| the position (due to the series of sexual misconduct at the
| company), ultimately withdrewing his nomination two years
| later.
|
| Right now, when Neil Jacobs (long time vocal proponent of
| comercialising weather data who maintained a social media
| profile called "The Greatest Hoax" in reference to climate
| change) and Taylor Jordan (a lobbyist for many weather
| companies, including AccuWeather of course) got appointed
| into the position of overseeing NOAA.
| imglorp wrote:
| If the sabotage proceeds, effects will be felt by nautical,
| aviation, agriculture, commerce, water management,
| hydroelectric, and on and on. Weather is critical
| infrastructure for everything like roads and power. It can't
| be replaced by privatization.
|
| It's another attack from within.
| arm32 wrote:
| > It's another attack from within.
|
| So, Wednesday?
| Applejinx wrote:
| Yup. I concur, it'll be because they expect sabotage.
| ToucanLoucan wrote:
| You're not wrong, but their idiotic ideas having
| catastrophic effects hasn't stopped them doing anything
| yet. Probably because none of them have a clue what they're
| doing.
| imoverclocked wrote:
| That's open to interpretation; Obviously, someone has a
| clue since it's part of a plan. It may just be that the
| people who have no clue are put there to make following
| the plan easier.
| brokencode wrote:
| Just because they have a plan, doesn't mean they have a
| clue. Their reasoning for this could be as simple as
| "government bad".
|
| Just look at the wild abandon with which DOGE has gone
| about its cuts. They literally fired the experts who
| inspect our nuclear arsenal, then had to scramble to hire
| them back because you know.. it's literally nuclear bombs
| we're talking about.
| kingkawn wrote:
| If the plan is "break things" it does not imply any
| underlying of understanding, both of the things in
| question or even how to effectively break them
| babypuncher wrote:
| They know exactly what they're doing.
|
| The billionaire class are bilking the country for every
| cent its worth, and when everything finally crumbles they
| will move to the next country with a stable middle class
| and start the process all over again.
|
| They do not care about these consequences because they
| have enough resources at their disposal to protect
| themselves while everyone else suffers.
| rjbwork wrote:
| Leveraged buying/private equity play at the scale of the
| nation state.
| _heimdall wrote:
| Aren't the problems you point to just business
| justification for companies offering this service for a fee
| rather than subsidizing the fees with federal debt?
| joezydeco wrote:
| I've seen this repeated many times but I have yet to see
| anyone mention, by name, which paid weather service is
| selling a feed with the same level of service and
| coverage as the NWS/NOAA. Anyone?
| imglorp wrote:
| Only NWS has a vast network of sensors: river gauges
| (with USGS), doppler radars, satellites, airport AOS
| automated observation systems, etc etc. to support the
| mission.
|
| Most of the privates are just repackaging their feeds and
| data. So if you kill NOAA they will have to start almost
| from scratch.
| dingnuts wrote:
| In my experience, having used several paid weather APIs
| for hobby crap, the NWS ones are generally the worst in
| every way.
|
| They're slower, harder to query, the documentation is
| worse, and they have less data available because the
| others buy data from private weather stations and re
| bundle it in addition to pre processing and repackaging
| the Federal data into better formats on your behalf
|
| I say this as a NOAA lover; the government just isn't
| good at building APIs.
| _heimdall wrote:
| Well you're describing the chicken and egg problem. If
| there is high demand for this data a company would fill
| that niche, but they would have no reason to until the
| free data is gone.
|
| I also think this chain of comments is a bit off the
| rails of my original point (maybe my fault). It honestly
| doesn't matter if there is pain to be felt by removing
| government services, we spend entirely too much money and
| any solution to that _will_ hurt.
|
| If we are only willing to remove spending that hurts
| little to no one we might as well throw in the towel
| already, we'll never cut spending with that as a gate.
| Larrikin wrote:
| No
| bearcobra wrote:
| Companies can and do offer data for a fee. In the same
| way that private toll road existing doesn't mean we
| should get rid of the highway system, a paid option
| doesn't mean the government should stop providing a
| publicly funded option given the immense value it
| provides to society
| _heimdall wrote:
| If the government option successfully creates a
| government monopoly, maybe we should?
|
| In this case we simply don't know what the market needs
| or market value of these services are because no one is
| incentivized to compete with the subsidized government
| program.
| chaorace wrote:
| Yes, of course. We're all reasonable adults who are
| capable of acknolwedging that services of value cost
| money.
|
| It just so happens that weather is a phenomenon which
| affects all people and requires large, distributed,
| passive infrastructure to effectively manage. It's a
| classic case where the public option is bound to be more
| efficient in terms of absolute resource allocation.
|
| On what basis do I assert that it's "bound" to be more
| efficient? Simple: weather affects the production,
| transportation, and logistics of virtually _all_ goods.
| The costs of weather are therefore distributed equally
| across society regardless of government policy.
| Government is very good at delivering this specific type
| of centralized basic infrastructure in a cost-effective
| way ( _see also: roads_ ), so if we're all paying for it
| together regardless this is a no-brainer policy.
| appreciatorBus wrote:
| If weather info is that valuable to so many private
| interests, wouldn't the public get a better deal by
| insisting that private interests pay market prices (to the
| public service provider) for that info?
|
| We commonly assume that a publicly owned service serves the
| public good by giving away the service for free, but this
| assumes the public's only role is as passive consumer,
| whose sole interest is seeing the price as low as possible,
| if not $0
|
| However the public is also the owner and as owners of the
| service, we are arguably being taking advantage of by
| private interests who take the free data, only to turn
| around and create private value with it.
| ViscountPenguin wrote:
| I mean, there's a relatively famous mechanism for
| garnering a portion of all private value produced by such
| a thing.
| actionfromafar wrote:
| I know, I know! ... is it _tariffs_? Because then China
| and Mexico will pay them!
| spankalee wrote:
| Like roads, parks, postal service, police, fire fighting,
| education, sewers, etc., the government is allowed to
| provide public goods. We don't have to live in a
| Libertarian dystopia.
| rconti wrote:
| Maybe the public would get a better deal fiscally.
|
| Would having to change APIs every 17 months as providers
| change their terms, constantly having to deal with
| breaking changes, etc, etc, etc be a "better deal"?
| There's an advantage in stability, and that's one thing
| governments typically provide. Yes, you can argue "a
| private provider could provide stability... for a fee".
| Which works great until it turns out even the fee isn't
| enough to keep them around. And you have to switch
| providers. Again.
| Theodores wrote:
| Compare and contrast the American and the British weather
| services.
|
| In the USA it was the case that, if the taxpayer paid for
| it, then it was free. Meanwhile, in the UK, the Thatcher
| government decided that it would be best if government
| agencies earned their keep. As a consequence, in the UK,
| weather data became chargeable. This meant that there was
| no growth of third party applications that built on Met
| Office data.
|
| This became a market distortion with TV weather, where
| the BBC had their data from the Met Office whereas ITV
| had to use American data, with a specialist broadcaster -
| The Weather Department - providing the video inserts. The
| Weather Department eventually came into competition with
| the Met Office providing their own video inserts, so the
| marketplace was uncompetitive yet 'competitive'.
|
| Compare with the BBC online news, which does not have to
| pay for itself in the same way that the mainstream news
| organisations such as The Guardian, The Telegraph et al.
| have to either go for paywalls or a smorgasbord of
| adverts. It is essentially impossible to compete against
| the BBC for news eyeballs online in the UK due to this
| competition model.
|
| With weather you need two independent supercomputer
| outfits that crunch the numbers and come up with forecast
| data. Why two (or more)? Because forecast models can be
| wrong in ways that human forecasters can understand and
| work with. If there are two 'sources of truth' then you
| can use your gut to go with which one feels right.
|
| Vast supercomputer outfits cost lots of money and, until
| recently, only a government of considerable size could
| pay for such an investment. The investment isn't just in
| the computers, you need a constant stream of
| meteorologists that can work with the data, so that means
| one or more universities with the specialism. In the UK
| we have Reading, that is the best place to go to if you
| want to get into forecasting, for TV, the military,
| farming or aviation.
|
| Free weather data is a public good and also 'soft power'.
| In Ireland they don't have their own weather
| supercomputers or universities that are renowned for
| producing expert weather forecasters, hence they need
| British or American help.
|
| I also forgot the satellites, which is in another league
| of expense, but necessary for all kinds of observation
| data.
|
| Observations are interesting as the reliance has
| historically been on airfields. We missed a chance to get
| mobile phone base stations reporting in to have vastly
| more data. Given the amount of money involved in mobile,
| when the governments sold off the spectrum they could
| have used the opportunity to insist on weather
| observation data being collected, in order to refine the
| model.
|
| Sometimes you get a town next to a lake with a massive
| mountain behind it where the forecast will consistently
| be wrong due to how the modelling works and a lack of
| observation data to make corrections. There are many
| scenarios such as this and the mobile phone masts could
| have been used to fill the gaps.
|
| If the UK provided free data (and the USA didn't) then we
| wouldn't talking about AccuWeather, it would be some
| British company that the world would be relying on for
| their apps. This British company would be modest in size
| but still providing good jobs and keeping graduates from
| Reading employed. In turn they would be working with
| people developing specialist apps, for example, weather
| for race courses and there would be much tax paid to
| government to make it worth their while, plus national
| prestige in having 'the best weather service' going.
|
| Another example of a British mistake is the Ordnance
| Survey, purveyor of paid for maps. Nobody uses Ordnance
| Survey, it is always Google Maps, Apple Maps or
| OpenStreetMap. They get pennies from developers and
| architects that need the official Ordnance Survey maps
| but nothing from day to day usage, in effect they have
| lost out.
|
| All these things need to be for the public good, paid for
| out of public taxation and a genuine free market of
| private enterprise fostered, otherwise nothing happens.
| Spooky23 wrote:
| Exactly. We don't some socialists telling us about
| hurricanes. The peasants can't afford umbrellas anyway.
| TehCorwiz wrote:
| We do pay for these services. Both as individuals and as
| organizations. It's called taxes. And those taxes are set
| by congress, people we elect to represent us. And
| congress also determines how those taxes will be spent.
| In this case, we've been collecting and spending taxes on
| delivering critical weather information and maintaining
| critical weather monitoring apparatus. Because commerce,
| safety, etc rely on that information.
|
| Can you imagine how things might be different if there
| was an additional group of people involved whose only
| goal is to siphon money out? Capitalism is predicated on
| the idea that the goal is to charge the most and deliver
| the least. In this case doing that would mean delays at
| best and death at worst. Weather is dangerous.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _If weather info is that valuable to so many private
| interests, wouldn 't the public get a better deal by
| insisting that private interests pay market prices (to
| the public service provider) for that info?_
|
| There are plenty of private weather companies, and many
| private companies employ their own meteorologists and
| massive computers to generate their own forecasts. (Think
| agriculture, logistics, aviation, oil exploration.)
|
| Not every company can afford a supercomputer. The NWS
| forecasts and data are valuable to every other person and
| company.
|
| Also, the addition of NWS data makes everyone's weather
| forecasts better. Note how television hurricane forecasts
| don't show one model, but many models from many sources.
| All this again is in the interest of commerce, which
| drives tax revenue.
| Alupis wrote:
| > It's another attack from within.
|
| The amount of fearmongering and scaremongering in this
| thread is literally off the charts.
|
| No, the weather service isn't being shut down... one
| private organization decides to charge for API access (you
| know, to make money) and immediately you folks go straight
| into sabotage and end-of-the-world conspiracy theories.
|
| It took me all of 3 seconds to find several mentions to the
| big ooga-booga, "project 2025". The article is literally
| about a _private organization_ and you folks go right into
| the conspiracies... it 's exhausting.
|
| At this point, I think I have to assume some of you
| actually _enjoy_ being afraid. Some sort of coping
| mechanism for losing an election and not getting your way
| for 4 years...
| Spooky23 wrote:
| Accuweather spent a lot of money lobbying to charge for
| NWS data years ago. It's not exactly a secret or a
| conspiracy to assume they wouldn't like to replace free
| weather data with their own subscriptions.
| Alupis wrote:
| So what does a _private_ organization deciding to charge
| for their own API access have to do with the
| government???
|
| Get your weather data from NWS if you want... serving an
| API to anyone/everyone costs money, and AccuWeather
| apparently decided enough was enough. AccuWeather has _no
| obligation_ to give you free resources. Same as Reddit,
| same as Twitter, same as so many companies before them.
|
| Oh no, that's right. It _must_ be a conspiracy to end the
| world!
|
| Here's the actual NWS API[1], you know... the free one
| that's not going away nor is charging for access.
|
| [1] https://www.weather.gov/documentation/services-web-
| api
| jfengel wrote:
| So, you missed the part where "project 2025" is about the
| _government_ ending access to this information?
|
| And that this "private organization" is one of the
| supporters of "project 2025"?
|
| This is not hidden. This is happening in public. And yes,
| the worst hasn't happened yet -- the government removing
| access to data that has long been free -- but if it does,
| would you agree that it is a bad thing?
|
| If you think that the government should indeed do that,
| then this isn't a conspiracy theory; it's just saying out
| loud that this is a thing you're encouraging the
| government to do. If you think the government should not
| do that, then you should consider the evidence that it is
| in fact happening.
| Alupis wrote:
| > This is not hidden. This is happening in public.
|
| Yes, a _private organization_ has decided to charge for
| access to their resources, aka their API.
|
| What on earth does that have to do with the government
| and this boogey-man "project 2025"???
|
| Step off your soap box for a moment and contemplate what
| you are saying. It's lunacy at it's finest...
|
| Was it "project 2025" that made Reddit charge for their
| API access? What about Twitter? Booga-booga!
| sbstp wrote:
| Project 2025 strongly opposes everything good in this world.
| reactordev wrote:
| To them, it's bad, to us, it's good. Good and bad are
| subjective when one side refuses science. You can show them
| data until you're blue in the face but they won't
| understand it, they won't listen to reason because they are
| on a mission to remake the US like their racist
| grandfathers liked it. All workers report to the floor.
| pstuart wrote:
| Their adherents are too irony impaired to realize that
| "they are the baddies".
| cess11 wrote:
| That will surely make US agriculture great again.
| foobarian wrote:
| Time to buy Gatorade stock
| seemaze wrote:
| It's got what plants crave
| cess11 wrote:
| If I wanted to gamble on stocks I'd rather look for a way
| to short Nvidia sometime soon.
| mikestew wrote:
| What you replied to...wasn't really investment advice.
| throw0101b wrote:
| > _https://gizmodo.com/republicans-project-2025-would-end-
| free-..._
|
| John Oliver did an episode on this during Trump 1.0:
|
| * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMGn9T37eR8
|
| * https://www.imdb.com/title/tt11110660/
|
| * s06e26: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Last_Week_Ton
| ight_with...
|
| * https://old.reddit.com/r/television/comments/dhmo0c/weather
| _...
| lelandfe wrote:
| Also talked about in Michael Lewis's book _Fifth Risk_.
| throw0101b wrote:
| > _Also talked about in Michael Lewis's book_ Fifth Risk.
|
| Highly recommend that book. Haven't gotten to his most
| recent _Who Is Government?_ :
|
| * https://www.penguinrandomhouse.ca/books/788713/who-is-
| govern...
|
| But from the interviews it sounds interesting as well.
| Colbert interview from April 2025:
|
| * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T30BF32qPgg
| lelandfe wrote:
| Thanks for the heads up, added to the list
| _heimdall wrote:
| This is one I don't really understand why the change would be
| a huge deal in context, the framing of an article as
| republicans sabotaging the miracle of free weather report
| APIs is just confusing.
|
| If our government were massively in debt and continuing to
| increase the deficit, maybe I'd understand wanting to
| consider weather report APIs as a public good worth funding
| with tax dollars. We should be cutting everything we can to
| avoid a complete train wreck though, why would this float to
| the top of the list?
| inetknght wrote:
| > _We should be cutting everything we can to avoid a
| complete train wreck though, why would this float to the
| top of the list?_
|
| It makes a lot more sense when you consider that certain
| people think that climate change isn't real while weather
| science supports the idea that the climate not only can
| change but _is_ changing, and that humans are the cause of
| it.
| _heimdall wrote:
| That has nothing to do with daily weather reports. I feel
| you on the whole climate change debate, it just isn't
| relevant here.
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| First, shutting down programs like this is like leaving the
| lights off in your home because you can't make rent of the
| mortgage. Saving $0.025 off your energy bill is not going
| to meaningfully help.
|
| Second, it's at the top because it's a public good of
| obviously enormous value that a common shmuck can
| understand.
| _heimdall wrote:
| I guess I'm a common shmuck. What is the public good, and
| specifically why is it a public good that is so difficult
| for the free market to provide that the government needs
| to run and subsidize it?
| jjulius wrote:
| >What is the public good...
|
| ... in providing a weather forecast?
| avhon1 wrote:
| It's not that weather is difficult for markets to
| provide. It's that it's worthwhile for the government to
| make it freely available to everyone.
| noboostforyou wrote:
| > What is the public good
|
| Accurate, scientific information to make informed
| decisions that can affect your safety and well-being. If
| you have to drive over a bridge or close to a body of
| water every day but you know there is a high chance of
| flooding tomorrow would you still travel to the same high
| risk area?
|
| What do you think is the role of government? To improve
| the lives of its citizens should be up there, do you
| agree?
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| Public services like NWS use a public service model. The
| idea is literally to provide as comprehensive a service
| as possible.
|
| A private service will provide a _profitable_ service,
| which will be cut-down, nickel-and-dimed, and generally
| enshitified for profitability,
|
| Financially, the relatively small cost of these public
| services makes a negligible contribution to taxes while
| providing huge national benefits.
| 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
| Ask all of those people who just drowned in Texas and are
| complaining that the weather warnings should have been
| given sooner.
| _heimdall wrote:
| Is that a solution only governments can provide? And in
| that case was the failing at the federal or local level?
| jwagenet wrote:
| The problem is this predicted cut and others are a drop in
| the bucket (for the government). They are a rounding error
| compared to what's added to spending with the recent bill.
| _heimdall wrote:
| It isn't just the recent spending bill, we've been
| racking up debt since Clinton was in office.
|
| While I agree this wouldn't make a meaningful dent in the
| deficit, every bit helps. Should we instead sit around
| until there's political will to take on the budget of the
| DoD, entitlements, and our debt's own interest payments?
| gxs wrote:
| Because it's not a drop in the bucket, it's not even a
| droplet of mist
|
| There are so many things to clean up before you get to this
|
| Given that, Idy pose the same question to you, why
| prioritize cutting this?
|
| I would almost consider this public infrastructure and we
| should definitely keep it
| _heimdall wrote:
| Well to start with, I'd ask if its just an easy one to
| cut - maybe because there are alternatives or it isn't
| really on the level of a fundamental human right.
|
| Balancing our budget is going to hurt like hell and
| everyone will bleed. That doesn't mean the answer is to
| say fuck it and keep racking up debt.
| ryoshoe wrote:
| Given the context of the historically largest budget
| deficit alongside decreased taxes on the wealthiest
| Americans, it's genuinely hard to believe the goal of
| this cut is balancing our budget
| 0cf8612b2e1e wrote:
| If you care abut the deficit, then should cancel that big
| tax cut that was just signed into law.
| monkeywork wrote:
| >This is one I don't really understand why the change would
| be a huge deal in context
|
| This is likely because you don't use the weather reports
| for anything of value/importance in your daily life - there
| are other professions / government departments / etc that
| _DO_ use these reports and require them for safety reasons.
|
| Just for a quick example anyone involved in aviation.
| mystraline wrote:
| NOAA is a military agency. It is not civilian, like VA,
| ICE, or Dept of State.
|
| Weather provided realtime marine, atmospheric, and solar
| weather to better equip theatres of war and aid.
|
| Without weather, soldiers conducting defense, offense, or
| aid operations have that much less intel on making
| decisions. The side effect is less climate change and
| national weather reporting.
|
| If anything, the stripping down soft power, intelligence,
| science, and everything seems like a plan to turn us into
| a 3rd world kleptocratic kakistocracy. Then again,
| capitalism has went from innovation and creation, to
| extraction and worsening.
|
| Maybe its time to let China take the reins and show what
| socialism can accomplish. If the videos on Xiao Hong Shu
| (rednote) are any indication, they're doing absolutely
| superbly.
| aspenmayer wrote:
| NOAA is under the Chamber of Commerce. The military has
| their own meteorological capabilities from what I
| understand, though they may also use NOAA data. I don't
| know how you mean that NOAA is a military agency, as they
| are not in the chain of command of any military agency or
| group.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Oceanic_and_Atmosp
| her...
|
| Even their officers are not armed services, though they
| do receive a commission. I think you might be thinking of
| something that I haven't seen or heard about, so please
| let me know if I am wrong.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOAA_Commissioned_Officer_C
| orp...
| bearcobra wrote:
| Weather data is incredibly important to a huge number of
| activities and to the general safety of the public, which
| is why the government is providing it in the first place.
| Debt to fund it is almost certain to economically
| productive. The republican controlled congress is cutting
| taxes and raising debt levels. A similar argument could be
| made that we should continue to fund services and raise
| taxes to reduce deficits instead
| rurp wrote:
| The same people who want to cut this service just added a
| _million_ times that amount to the national debt. Any claim
| that this is about saving money is transparent bullshit.
|
| Free weather data has massive positive externalities. Just
| like in so many other areas, this administration is
| destroying a common good to benefit a handful of private
| individuals.
| vorgol wrote:
| Project 2025 is 46% completed:
| https://www.project2025.observer/
| GlitchRider47 wrote:
| Strange that their progress distribution chart shows a
| lower percentage (36%) which happens to be the correct one:
| https://www.project2025.observer/visualize/charts
| EvanAnderson wrote:
| For now.
|
| https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/as-trump-slashed-weath...
| fitsumbelay wrote:
| Yep
| runarb wrote:
| The Norwegian Meteorological Institute also have free forecast
| for any location on earth: https://developer.yr.no/featured-
| products/forecast/
| cyberax wrote:
| They won't have access to the same primary data as the NWS.
| Although it might be an opportunity for something like
| PurpleAir.
| aredox wrote:
| The Norwegian meteorological Institute, as well as all
| European meteorological agencies, shares but also rely on
| shared data from other agencies, including NOAA. Most of the
| Atlantic weather buoys, for example...
| cmiles74 wrote:
| AccuWeather has been trying to privatize NWS since it's
| inception. I believe the current head of the NOAA was actually
| the AccuWeather CEO. IMHO, it's only a matter of time before he
| shuts off public access to NSW forecase data, no matter the
| impact on real people and businesses (except maybe
| AccuWeather).
|
| https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/14/politics/noaa-nominee-accuwea...
| Brosper wrote:
| USA is only one country. What about the rest?
| bix6 wrote:
| NWS costs $1.3B a year and the ROI is 5-11x based on reports I
| can find. So every $1 gives Americans $11 of value. But yeah
| let's trash it to save money or whatever...
| pastureofplenty wrote:
| I'll just keep scraping
| greenavocado wrote:
| I can see it already:
|
| In other news, AccuWeather servers overwhelmed with requests
| after shutting down Weather API
| ysavir wrote:
| Nah. We just need one source to scrape them and make the
| results available for others.
| Retr0id wrote:
| A while back I RE'd the accuweather mobile app and pulled out
| the API key, it wasn't too hard.
| mlhpdx wrote:
| If you'd like a preview of what access to weather data will be
| like (soon) just have a look at access to nautical navigation
| charts.
| andsoitis wrote:
| How the winds are changing
| donohoe wrote:
| "AccuWeather is excited to share important updates"
|
| Yes. Yes, I'm sure you are.
| tailspin2019 wrote:
| Such corporate speak reminds me of "the values of the Carphone
| Warehouse":
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2firijxQOo
| amysox wrote:
| That's like the old saying that when a company starts its
| message with _" In order to serve you better...",_ what they
| really mean is _" Bend over and assume the position."_
| micromacrofoot wrote:
| the forecast calls for enshittification
| firesteelrain wrote:
| I assume AccuWeather is receiving large cloud egress bills and
| thus needs to start charging?
| michaelsshaw wrote:
| The NWS is being gutted so Accu is preparing to rake in
| extortionate profits off public safety information.
| stego-tech wrote:
| Serious question: what other national or global-level weather
| services are freely available via API to end users? With
| AccuWeather going all-in on premium access and the NWS/NOAA being
| sabotaged, is there anywhere else with freely available high-
| quality data out there in readily-ingestible formats?
| rajh wrote:
| In the Netherlands we have the KNMI data platform
| (https://dataplatform.knmi.nl) and also an open source weather
| app (https://gitlab.com/KNMI-OSS/KNMI-App).
| slenk wrote:
| I noticed that before when looking at some weather APIs. You
| have a lot better data in Europe available
| saint_yossarian wrote:
| Here's a convenient list: https://github.com/breezy-
| weather/breezy-weather/blob/main/d...
| open-meteo wrote:
| I've been building an open-source weather API over the past few
| years. It pulls in data from a wide range of global and local
| high-resolution weather models. The API is free to use without
| an API key, though there are commercial options available. I'm
| the sole owner behind it. No VC funding or outside backing.
|
| The core tech is tuned for performance, using local gridded
| files instead of a traditional database or response caching.
| This efficiency is what allows it to stay free.
|
| You can try it here: https://open-meteo.com
| jamesblonde wrote:
| Love open-meteo - no registration or API key required. Great
| for tutorials. I used it my upcoming O'Reilly book- use
| weather to predict air quality at the street level:
| https://github.com/featurestorebook/mlfs-book/
| slenk wrote:
| I use that in HomeAssistant. Love it!
| dejobaan wrote:
| This is fantastic; thank you for it. The "try the API" page
| is also excellent!
| geoka9 wrote:
| So true, it is so awesome. I've just replaced my weather
| network bookmark with the open-meteo's "API Response"
| chart. I hope open-meteo doesn't mind :)
| jasonthorsness wrote:
| Awesome, I will change https://weather.bingo to use this
| service; the previous paid API I used was too expensive to
| justify given I was the only real user :P.
| RebeccaTheDev wrote:
| Just wanted to say thank you for this service. I have a
| little homebrew clock I build from a Raspberry Pi and a small
| display in my bathroom. Below the time, it displays the
| weather forecast for the day so I know how to dress. That
| little clock has become an essential piece of my morning
| routine.
|
| I switched to Open Meteo a few months ago when the previous
| API I was using quit working. It's been rock solid and such a
| nice user experience compared to everything else I tried.
| nox_pp wrote:
| Have been meaning to look into OpenMeteo for
| https://luxweather.com
|
| We've been using OWM but the One Call API quickly gets pricey
| when traffic spikes.
| wuyishan wrote:
| I've recently found https://open-meteo.com/ - maybe that ticks
| some of the boxes?
| Ueland wrote:
| The Norwegian MET does, https://api.met.no/
|
| They also provide yr.no which is widely used worldwide.
| klinquist wrote:
| https://pirateweather.net/en/latest/
| dyeje wrote:
| I imagine there is a lot of new pressure on public APIs now that
| there's an explosion of vibe coded projects accessing them (some
| probably quite haphazardly).
| pmdr wrote:
| It's probably just good old-fashioned greed. Worked for X and
| Reddit, why wouldn't it work for them?
| 0x457 wrote:
| Uhm, having a weather api is probably the easiest thing to
| implement because of how catchable it is. Any public api
| accidental can be prevented by tiered rate-limiting:
|
| - uber low limits for anon access
|
| - low, but reasonable for register free users
|
| - Up-to-you for paid users
|
| You might say: well, proxies are cheaper than paid plan, and
| solution to that - charge reasonable price.
| sitzkrieg wrote:
| you should see what happened when people finally understood
| XMLHttpRequest!
| jasonthorsness wrote:
| I ran a weather site for a year or so (that also showed
| YESTERDAY'S weather, that was the key feature) using visual
| crossing's data, until someone started scraping all the cities of
| the world every hour and running up my costs (visual crossing is
| pay-per-data-point) so I had to shut it down.
|
| It surprises me that in 2025 we can't just support global free
| weather data as some kind of cooperative service. It's not like
| it's high-bandwidth or even all that high-volume.
| dawnerd wrote:
| There is public free weather, for now at least, where do you
| think the private weather companies source it from? They're
| just repackaging it.
| jasonthorsness wrote:
| The last time I had checked (this was over a year ago) there
| was nothing that provided world-wide data in a consistent
| format except the paid APIs, of which only one had a good
| historical data service.
|
| I could switch my site to just use NWS and be US only I
| suppose; better than just being completely off. Adding all
| the weather services of every country in the world is too
| much for me (and why I guess the paid services are value-
| add).
| Ueland wrote:
| The Norwegian MET has had it for years, for free.
| https://api.met.no/
|
| They also provide yr.no which is widely used worldwide.
| phillipseamore wrote:
| https://open-meteo.com/
| jasonthorsness wrote:
| Looks promising, thanks!
| tempestn wrote:
| Fantastic feature btw; certainly more than once I've wished
| weather apps/sites would show recent history.
| whalesalad wrote:
| Your statements are somewhat contradictory. You said that you
| were being scraped so you had to shut the service down due to
| costs... but then you also say that this not a high-bandwidth
| or high-volume service.
| jasonthorsness wrote:
| I was the only regular user (it's basically a POC/concept
| site), so it was extremely low volume except for the
| scraper(s), who suddenly became high-volume. I could have
| done more research into scraper/bot blocking but I didn't
| have the time and needed to respond to the scrapers
| immediately, so I pulled the plug.
|
| EDIT: I have also since learned of Vercel's bot/scraper
| blocking features so I'm also going to try turning those on
| and see if it stops the scraping.
| nox_pp wrote:
| For https://luxweather.com I detect bots/scrapers by user
| agent and just serve them a fake forecast, brought our bill
| way down :)
| jasonthorsness wrote:
| Ha that's a great idea; proactive anti-bot solutions like
| that are hilarious
| mkerrigan wrote:
| OpenWeather still has a free tier. https://openweathermap.org/
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| Yup! I use it for an IRC bot that allows users to request the
| current weather or a forecast for a location.
|
| Unfortunately, the API for searching for a location is terrible
| and often gets locations wrong.
| SSJPython wrote:
| Why is something so essential, so basic, like the weather
| forecast being privatized? Why is everything becoming so shit?
| CamperBob2 wrote:
| Because stupid people are easy to herd to the polls.
| swyx wrote:
| because good data costs money?
|
| how would you feel if you were the SWE on the other side of
| this API and people demand it for free
| Vinnl wrote:
| Usually the opposite of privatisation is not that something
| magically appears for free, but that it is funded by a
| state.
| monkeywork wrote:
| There is an SWE on the other side of this API - and I
| imagine they are enjoying a government salary and pension
| for operating it... people accessing it for free wouldn't
| impact them.
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| This carries the same energy as arguing against "free"
| healthcare by claiming that doctors shouldn't be expected
| to work for free.
|
| Nobody is expecting anybody to work for free. We expect
| government to pay for it. I think you know this and pretend
| not to for some reason.
| masklinn wrote:
| Because nothing can exist in America if middlemen don't make
| money out of it, the more the better.
|
| You can see a literal example of that thinking in the comments
| of _heimdall for whom valuable commons are unexploited business
| cases.
| fitsumbelay wrote:
| As @otterly already posted there has, is and will always be
| weather.gov
|
| As a matter of fact US Commerce department provides many API
| services including free geolocation (wuuut) via census.gov among
| so many services
|
| A side note about Trump and politics/shmolitix etc: his stageshow
| budget cuts will have short term impact but will likely be
| repaired when the House flips and Dems make gains in the Senate
| after the mid terms. A lot of White Americans living at or below
| the poverty line will be hurt by the scheduled cuts and will have
| questions n' thoughts, but man this Epstein footcannon-nuclear-
| grenade-launcher of Trump's just might be the thing that ends
| Republican Party's 10 year abusive relations with an objectively
| adjudicated and multifacted criminal
| mindslight wrote:
| Have you not been paying attention for the past several
| decades? Trump is unprecedented in audacity, crassness, and
| degree of harm. But the overall trend is right in line with
| what Republicans have been doing for thirty+ years (at least as
| long as I've been paying attention). And no, the destruction
| does not cause people to vote Democrat in response. People
| become more desperate, more reactionary, more quick to blame
| their fellow citizens, and more easy to lead towards supporting
| even more destruction - this is exactly how we've arrived at
| Trump in the first place. When the Democrats do get back in
| office, they effectively act as controlled opposition. Even if
| they try to undo the damage, most actions are sabotaged by a
| few "moderates" that have been captured by the corpos just like
| the Republicans. And then the Republican machine goes to work
| projecting - pointing to the Democrats' failings as open
| corruption, inability to do anything, fiscal irresponsibility
| as price inflation finally appears from the Republicans'
| profligate spending, etc.
|
| Personally I'm not really worried about the "no more elections"
| panic narrative, because I think the real answer is that there
| isn't going to be much of a federal government left to take the
| reigns of.
| Applejinx wrote:
| The scientists I know have been pretty loud about there being
| no good way to repair what's been broken. Stuff can't just be
| turned on again.
|
| I do expect more than just flipping off a switch: at some level
| there'll be outright sabotage, of data systems or physical
| hardware or both, for the purposes of destroying what is being
| made to go away.
|
| This is because that's why it's being done. Budget concerns
| were never the point. It's the wholesale destruction of
| American soft power and indispensable systems. That's why I
| expect physical sabotage under cover of 'decommissioning'.
| jeffbee wrote:
| White Americans have been self-sabotaging for 150 years and it
| is fine with them, they are completely happy with this
| situation as long as Black Americans are harmed at least as
| much. This is the only motivating reason behind about a third
| of the American electorate.
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| Pirate Weather API https://pirateweather.net/en/latest/ which
| powers Merry Sky http://merrysky.net/
| skeptrune wrote:
| Brings back good memories. One of the first things I ever built
| was a Twitter weather bot using their free API.
| pimlottc wrote:
| I assume you meant "weather bot"
| skeptrune wrote:
| Yes lol
| sitzkrieg wrote:
| im still mad apple bought and killed darksky. ripped one of the
| best weather apis
| superxpro12 wrote:
| Thank you for my daily trigger.... I am also still mad about
| this.
| JoshGlazebrook wrote:
| Another one bites the dust. I've used weather underground api,
| yahoo weather api, dark sky api, and all of them have gone from
| free to paid (or just not public anymore) over the years.
| Currently using pirate weather -
| https://pirateweather.net/en/latest/
| scarface_74 wrote:
| Dark Sky was never free for unlimited use.
|
| It's now Apple's WeatherKit.
|
| The first 500K calls a month is free with a $99 a year Apple
| Developer account and there is a standard REST API for none
| Apple OS's.
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| I feel its not nearly as useful as the old darksky api. The
| secret sauce of that software was that it combined typical
| weather data with local reports. Afaik there is no way to
| submit a weather report on the apple weather app. They bought
| it for the name and to kill a competing option essentially vs
| attempting to use what made that app actually compelling
| compared to other weather apps.
| OptionOfT wrote:
| There actually is.
|
| At the bottom - report an issue.
| svarrall wrote:
| If you scroll down on to the bottom of Apple Weather it has
| a "Report an Issue" button which allows you to report
| current weather conditions at your location.
|
| I have no idea what happens to that data and if it
| contributes to the report in any way.
| margalabargala wrote:
| > The first 500K calls a month is free with a $99 a year[...]
|
| They may be _included_ with your $99 /year subscription, but
| to call them "free" is like saying that the groceries I'm
| holding are free because I just gave the cashier money.
| hoosier2gator wrote:
| I would say it's more like saying that driving on the
| highway is free because you pay taxes. I doubt anyone is
| buying a developer account specifically for weather API
| calls.
| margalabargala wrote:
| Lots of people drive on highways who pay no highway
| taxes, foreign tourists for example.
|
| It's free like riding the monorail at Disney World is
| free; included in the cost of your entry ticket, and
| utterly inaccessible to anyone who has not paid.
| ge96 wrote:
| Is there any way people would be incentivized to setup a little
| weather station/contribute to data and get paid. Wonder if
| there's a model where people could make money/not game the
| system too. It would have to be standardized/verified to be
| accurate somehow.
| wmeredith wrote:
| > Wonder if there's a model where people could make money/not
| game the system too.
|
| We're up against the most basic of human nature here.
| Aurornis wrote:
| Blockchain people have been trying variations of this for a
| decade. Any time you create a system that pays people for
| data, it will be exploited to the extreme.
|
| I don't think you need to incentivize people to provide
| weather data. Just make it easy to set up a station and get a
| lot of people interested. There are already hobby stations
| out there and networks for them.
| ge96 wrote:
| Time series database comes in ding ding
|
| Yeah I could see the hobby-drive there
| noosphr wrote:
| Blockchains have clearance rates that are a few dozen
| orders of magnitude too slow for this. Bitcoin for example
| clears 7 transactions per second.
| Aurornis wrote:
| Bitcoin wasn't designed for high throughput. I'm
| referring to projects like the Helium network, which
| rewards people for running network nodes:
| https://www.helium.com/
|
| It doesn't work as well as they wanted and it has been
| subject to various exploits over the years from people
| figuring out how to fake the participation to extract
| rewards.
| noosphr wrote:
| >Bitcoin wasn't designed for high throughput
|
| >>Commerce on the Internet has come to rely almost
| exclusively on financial institutions serving as trusted
| third parties to process electronic payments. While the
| system works well enough for most transactions, it still
| suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based
| model. Completely non-reversible transactions are not
| really possible, since financial institutions cannot
| avoid mediating disputes. The cost of mediation increases
| transaction costs, limiting the minimum practical
| transaction size and cutting off the possibility for
| small casual transactions
|
| From the bitcoin white paper.
|
| >I'm referring to projects like the Helium network, which
| rewards people for running network nodes
|
| OK, what's the clearance rate for helium?
|
| Visa clears 35,000 a second.
| ben_w wrote:
| While that detail is true, the real problem is much more
| general: you have goal x, you use some proxy y for that
| goal, you pay people for y, they give you lots of y that
| may end up being the exact opposite of x.
|
| Famously, the British found x was "fewer cobras" and y
| was "cobra tails", the opposite of x being "the locals
| bred cobras to get money for cobra tails".
|
| Make a citizen science weather station that's free, it's
| all fine. Make it paid, someone's going to grab satellite
| pics and generate from them plausible but not necessarily
| accurate simulated weather station data for everywhere to
| get that money.
| zaphirplane wrote:
| Incentives do work in general. Sometimes they are abused.
| Incentives with no checks and balances are always abused.
| I don't think the generalized problem you discuss above
| is broadly general
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| I don't think they were saying to use blockchain to do
| this. It's just an example that shows that if you offer
| financial incentives in exchange for data people will
| exploit it and gameify it. The reason blockchain
| clearance rates are so slow is because of all the effort
| to prevent this. You could remove PoW from bitcoin and
| the network would be significantly faster. It would also
| be dominated by people exploiting it.
|
| It's the same thing with ad networks, most of the effort
| goes into verifying that an ad click was legitimate and
| not a bot. Or that classic story of when the British
| government tried to eliminate Cobras in India by paying a
| bounty for every dead cobra, which just led to people
| breeding more cobras.
| arghwhat wrote:
| You need to collect data _and_ run the weather models, which
| for good ones could require a lot of continuous compute
| resources.
| avhon1 wrote:
| People pay to have a tempest weather station
|
| https://tempest.earth/tempest-home-weather-system/
| ge96 wrote:
| interesting design, doesn't have the cliche anemometer
| spoons
| x0x0 wrote:
| That's pretty cool, thank you for sharing.
|
| Do you have any idea if you can plug this thing into a
| public api to share?
| threeio wrote:
| https://community.home-assistant.io/t/weatherflow-
| tempest-wh...
|
| Looks like it can be done with home assistant and then
| pushed up to collection locations, so I suspect things
| are pretty open
| WillAdams wrote:
| Isn't that Weather Underground's schtick?
| asteroidburger wrote:
| Many people have no problem setting up a station and giving
| away the data for free.
|
| https://map.purpleair.com/
|
| This is primarily for air quality by default, but you can get
| temperature, humidity, etc as well. For each station, someone
| paid for the hardware and is sharing the data gratis.
| vlod wrote:
| >It would have to be standardized/verified to be accurate
| somehow.
|
| You could do something that for the same zip/county,
| aggregates the results based on a certain percentage. You
| could weight it based on how many times a user is outside
| this range. (e.g. bad actors)
|
| I just got zigbee working in my house (SONOFF Zigbee 3.0 USB
| Dongle Plus Gateway). Is there any recommended weather nuts
| out there that could recommend a weather device (that they
| like and is cool), just in case someone wants to create a
| project and is looking for data providers.
| adolph wrote:
| There are a few models for community data
| collection/distribution that appear reasonably successful in
| ADS-B and bird tracking with commercial, non-commercial and
| academic examples. The challenge is that there are hard costs
| to collecting/persisting/distributing the data which are
| incompatible with free (which in reality just means someone
| else pays).
|
| https://www.adsbexchange.com/how-it-works/
|
| https://www.flightaware.com/adsb/
|
| https://www.birdweather.com/about
|
| https://ebird.org/about
| kjkjadksj wrote:
| Aren't all these services just abrogating some national weather
| service data? Is that api exposed to the public?
| jimmaswell wrote:
| Yes, and it's a free public service as I would expect.
| https://www.weather.gov/documentation/services-web-api
| SkyeCA wrote:
| I never considered government weather departments would
| provide APIs for their data, but after seeing your comment
| I went to see if Environment Canada provided one.
|
| I am _very_ impressed by how how much data they provide
| free of charge.
|
| https://api.weather.gc.ca/
| phillipseamore wrote:
| They do even better: https://eccc-msc.github.io/open-
| data/readme_en/
| perfectviking wrote:
| For now. A component of Project 2025 is to remove the
| public access.
| CyberDildonics wrote:
| Michael Lewis' book the fifth risk talks explicitly how
| someone with a paid weather app was put in charge of the
| commerce department (by trump) so he could try to hide
| public weather data but use it in his app then charge for
| it.
| squigz wrote:
| It's almost as if APIs cost money to run?!
| Havoc wrote:
| The march towards walled gardens continues.
|
| The internet as we know it (blogs etc) is going to stop existing
| and this will just turn into an protocol layer communicating
| between said walled gardens
|
| Bit miffed that the big tech orgs basically killed something that
| could be organic & community driven. If somehow a path could have
| been found to maintain and possibly even scale that sort of
| grassroot internet I think it could have turned into something
| unimaginably awesome. Big tech actively killed that trajectory
| gip wrote:
| WalleD gardens and walleT gardens - e.g. micropayments will
| make it possible to monetize data to the fullest and every
| users will need a wallet to access anything fresh online. That
| seems to be the trend, but I suspect a counter-trend will
| emerge too.
| Zenbit_UX wrote:
| Sure Apple, fb and LinkedIn were private gardens before it was
| cool, but there was still some incentive for some companies to
| stay public. That is until the AI wars and scrapping the entire
| internet constantly for training data was the norm.
| lxgr wrote:
| Semi off-topic, but does anybody know a good weather radar app
| that has coverage outside the US (with particular interest in
| Europe)?
|
| Apple/Dark Sky seems to only cover a very limited number of
| countries (despite many more providing radar data under open
| access), and zoom.earth seems to be shutting down precipitation
| radar by September.
| hnburnsy wrote:
| Windy
| jonp888 wrote:
| I use WetterOnline, it's German but I think it covers all of
| Europe.
| bhickey wrote:
| Time to dust off CloudyFS, the first filesystem to put the clouds
| in your files.
|
| https://github.com/bhickey/cloudyfs
| jvanderbot wrote:
| Strange timing, with all the talk of NOAA cuts.
| thegreatpeter wrote:
| It is truly remarkable how some of those affluent & resourceful
| devs in the world come here to complain about an API that now
| requires a subscription.
|
| Somebody, somewhere in the world has to build & maintain this
| API. Somebody's job depends on it. If you use it and you find it
| useful, you can afford to pay whatever they're willing to charge.
|
| Otherwise, build & maintain your own. Make sure you never charge
| for it!!
| wild_pointer wrote:
| https://wttr.in/ ftw
| throw4847285 wrote:
| A dark day for State College. What's next? No more Peachy Paterno
| at the Creamery? The Waffle Shop burning down?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-07-23 23:01 UTC)