The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) cannot reveal weather forecasts from a particularly accurate hurricane prediction model to the public that pays for the American government agency – because of a deal with a private insurance risk firm.

The model at issue is called the Hurricane Forecast Improvement Program (HFIP) Corrected Consensus Approach (HCCA). In 2023, it was deemed in a National Hurricane Center (NHC) report [PDF] to be one of the two “best performers,” the other being a model called IVCN (Intensity Variable Consensus).

2020 contract between NOAA and RenaissanceRe Risk Sciences, disclosed in response to a Freedom of Information Act request by The Washington Post, requires NOAA to keep HCCA forecasts – which incorporate a proprietary technique from RenaissanceRe – secret for five years.

66 points
*

This doesn’t sound so bad from the government’s perspective…

RenaissanceRe developed a piece of technology that the government wanted to use (for free) in their own hurricane model. The only way RenaissanceRe would allow this is if the government kept the models private for 5 years.

The government’s use of this data would help it to respond and prepare local governments for hurricanes. Keeping the data private for 5 years is the only way of getting it, so this is better than not having the data.

Maybe it’s a little shitty on RenaissanceRe‘s part, but it’s no different than healthcare companies keeping patents for a number of years knowing that their medicines could save lives if it were cheaper and more available.

Edit: Washington Post source

https://web.archive.org/web/20240926193035/https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2024/09/26/noaa-hurricane-model-hcca-accuweather/

permalink
report
reply
11 points

I didn’t see the “for free” part. Can you help?

permalink
report
parent
reply
19 points

From the original Washington post story

The agreement signed in 2020 by NOAA and the company enabled the agency to collaborate with the firm but does not allow the government to provide compensation. It states HCCA forecasts are “trade secrets and confidential information” that “shall not be publicly disclosed or disseminated” for a period of five years from the effective date of the agreement. The terms of the agreement were released to The Washington Post in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.

https://web.archive.org/web/20240926193035/https://www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2024/09/26/noaa-hurricane-model-hcca-accuweather/

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Thanks. I must have just missed it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
5 points
*

Well I can’t say how it works with software since my experience is only with hardware, but that’s not the way the government usually receives a product.

Usually the government puts out a Request for Proposal (RFP). Companies will respond with a proposal and the government chooses one. The product is developed and ultimately delivered to the government for it to use as it sees fit. If new technology is created during the development, the company providing the product can usually patent that technology.

It’s possible other models for this exist, but I’m not aware of any product the defense contractor I worked for ever telling the government how or where to use a product. On the other hand, I’m not aware of the government ever wanting to expose that knowledge either. Usually it’s the other way around. So it would be a non-issue.

But to me it makes no sense that the RESULTS of the model can’t be shared. The real important stuff is HOW the model works. I admit I did not read the article, only the piece at the bottom. Please disregard if this is based on false information.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points
*

In what you’re describing, the government pays for the software, then uses the software as they see fit. Probably includes service contracts that last for a year or so past dev completion.

Well, according to the Washington Post article, the government did not provide compensation for this. It seemed to me like this company developed this on its own and is allowing the government to use it to help people, but just wants 5 years of profiting off this before it goes public and is used by other private for profit weather companies.

Again, I’m not saying this is great, but the amount of rage in the comment section does not match what is actually happening.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

All I said was that it was not the normal way. I’m not paying judgement either way.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Sure John is shooting people to death but it’s no different than Jack stabbing people to death. Makes you think 🤔

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

It’s not good behavior

permalink
report
parent
reply
200 points

Can we please stop with the privitization? It’s absolutely not been working out very well for the people.

permalink
report
reply
43 points

Muwahahahaha!!! - Our corporate overlords, probably

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

But it makes so much money for corporations! Tax payer money is used for research and everything else that costs money, then we get a private company to just ‘commercialise’ it! Tax payers take on all the risk and investment, profits go straight to shareholders.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Then the private companies pay their CEO’s multiple times their corporate tax burden.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

This is actually the opposite of privatization. The government is using private technology that they will be able to make public in 5 years.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

they will be able to make public in 5 years.

That’s a bit late for a weather forecast.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Well they are taking something owned by a foreign company - i.e. owned by people who are not Americans - and creating a system that will help Americans.

I wish NOAA or NASA invented it, then we would have it now. But, in this case, private investment happened to be fastest.

Wishing is not much of a plan.

The actual alternative available to the US Government that would have prevented this angry response would have been to not even try to adapt this private technology.

Would that have been better?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

It worked in high growth economy 50-70’, and boomers are stuck there.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points
*
Removed by mod
permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

It worked for the people of this time, yes.

permalink
report
parent
reply
116 points

A deal penned under the Trump administration because of course it was. Government sold to the highest bidder.

permalink
report
reply
15 points

I was wondering why this felt so gross

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Well that would explain why the “Sharpie line Modelling” outperformed local newscasters
/s

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

I was wondering if this came before or after sharpiegate.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-5 points

Did you fact check this? +

permalink
report
parent
reply
61 points

This may well cost people their lives

permalink
report
reply
21 points

People?

Personhood doesn’t begin until $1M. The poor’s aren’t people

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

It probably already did last week when 160+ people died in the storm.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-10 points

They can’t reveal the model itself for 5 years but can obviously give the resulting forecast from it, so I don’t really see the big deal here. It’d be nice if it was freely available, but it’s not like the average person can use it without lots of knowledge and scientific equipment of their own and 5 years isn’t very long.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points
*

My guy, it says right there, twice:

…NOAA cannot reveal weather forecasts to the general public…

This fuckin’ guy 🤦

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

What about every other country on the planet?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-7 points

Do many of them get hit with hurricanes?

permalink
report
parent
reply
40 points

The US is effectively a corporation. We The People have lost control. The question is what we do about it.

permalink
report
reply
13 points

Bullshit. The US is an employee of a corporation of corporations.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Can you explain the difference in terms of the effect on the population?

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

We’re in direct control of the people with the most money. The government has lost all control. If it were a corporation, it would have control.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-6 points

Lol, what? What the fuck? Who are you?

permalink
report
parent
reply

News

!news@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

Community stats

  • 14K

    Monthly active users

  • 7.3K

    Posts

  • 129K

    Comments