Intellovations (my company) does collect lots of forecasts including probability of precipitation forecasts. One was even published by CustomWeather.
There are two measures of POP forecasts: accuracy, and resolution. The published study only measured accuracy. Measuring accuracy means verifying it rained 20% of the time the forecast said 20% chance of rain. Resolution means how useful the POP forecasts are. Since it it rains/snows about 30% of the time, always predicting 30% chance rain or snow is 100% accurate, but useless. A perfectly useful POP forecast would always predict either 0% or 100% for any given point. A perfectly useful and accurate POP forecast would always predict either 0% or 100% for any given point, and be right 100% of the time. Real POP forecasts fall somewhere in the middle.
Intellovations (my company) provides a weather forecast accuracy calculation product that is used by many meteorologists. It also compares forecasts against both climatological (tomorrow will be average) and persistence forecasts (tomorrow will be the same as today).
I can tell you that skilled weather forecasts handily beat persistence forecasts overall. However, there are some specific circumstances where that isn't true.
One other interesting thing is that in general persistence forecasts are more accurate than climate forecasts out to about 3 days, when they become less accurate than climate. That says a little something about how long weather systems last.
I was quite curious about weather forecast accuracy as well. So three years ago I started collecting weather forecasts from the primary providers (Accuweather, Weather Channel, NWS, CustomWeather, Intellicast, etc.) and comparing them to actual observations. It's tougher than you might imagine, and there are a lot of factors that need to go into creating usable verification statistics.
ForecastWatch.com is used by meteorologists and professionals. Accuweather, The Weather Channel, and several private meteorological companies use this system to help them understand and improve their weather forecasts.
And a geek note: ForecastWatch.com runs on Quixote (a Python web framework), while ForecastAdvisor.com runs on Ruby on Rails. The back-end forecast and actual collection, and calculations are Python with a MySQL database. Both sites are close to migrating to Django, a new Python web framework and ORM.
Its hilarious that Libertarians come up in this thread, as if putting one of them in power will automatically compel everyone to open up their wallets voluntarially.
It won't. But if it is a cause that people won't voluntarily fund, is it worth funding?
Before you claim that taxes are whats keeping everyone from doing this now, what about the tax deduction for donations?
You do realize that the deduction is on income, not on tax, which means that a $100 donation means $30 less tax (or thereabouts), not $100 less tax?
With a Libertarian President everyone could give to their favorite charity:
The Greeens could give to the organic farm commune
The Democrats could give to the abortion clinic
The Republicans could give to Halliburton
And everyone would be happy and live in peaceful harmony, and every four years it would be no big deal because it wouldn't matter so awful much.
it is the God-fearing liberal Democrats like John Kerry that best exemplify the self-sacrifice and social compassion Jesus had
No. I don't call forcing money from other people to ease their conciences exemplifying Jesus.
Kerry and Edwards are multi-millioniares. They want to spend your money for "social compassion and self-sacrifice", not theirs. Because they don't trust you with your own money to do the same.
The greater good of the overall population is to not have power concentrated in the hands of a few.
Because of the concentration of money at the Federal level, that is why there is so much riding on this, and each election.
I would rather live in a voluntary society, where each individual was free to vote with each dollar they spend, saved, or gave. The American people are a generous people (look at how much they gave after 9/11). It is ashame that so much is wasted on bureaucracy.
Money is power. Power corrupts. And 2 TRILLION dollars corrupts a lot. Our federal bureaucracy has misplaced BILLIONS, made Bernie Ebbers look like Mother Teresa, and yet we tolerate it because we have no choice.
We do have a choice! Libertarian Michael Badnarik is the only anti-war, pro-America, eliminate the deficit and reduce the waste of government candidate. And he is on the ballot in all but 1 or 2 states...far more than any other third party.
Let Badnarik debate!
-Ace
Younger people don't want to get shot at in a war that most believe, and firmly, never should have started because it was started with a president lying...
So I suppose that they are supporting Kerry because Kerry has publicly stated that he will add 40,000 troops to the Army. As a volunteer Army, where will these 40,000 troops come from?
As for Bush, who would you rather have in prison now, Saddam Hussein, or Osama bin Laden? Bush's "adventure" in Iraq has cost over 1,000 Americans their lives, and we are no closer to punishing the 9/11 murderers than we were three years ago.
The government which governs best, governs least. The only anti-war, pro-American Defense (not Offense), let you run your own life candidate is Libertarian Michael Badnarik. He will be on the ballot on all but 1 or 2 states.
Slashdot Mirror
Intellovations (my company) does collect lots of forecasts including probability of precipitation forecasts. One was even published by CustomWeather.
There are two measures of POP forecasts: accuracy, and resolution. The published study only measured accuracy. Measuring accuracy means verifying it rained 20% of the time the forecast said 20% chance of rain. Resolution means how useful the POP forecasts are. Since it it rains/snows about 30% of the time, always predicting 30% chance rain or snow is 100% accurate, but useless. A perfectly useful POP forecast would always predict either 0% or 100% for any given point. A perfectly useful and accurate POP forecast would always predict either 0% or 100% for any given point, and be right 100% of the time. Real POP forecasts fall somewhere in the middle.
You can check out more at the sites ForecastAdvisor.com and ForecastWatch.com.
-AceIntellovations (my company) provides a weather forecast accuracy calculation product that is used by many meteorologists. It also compares forecasts against both climatological (tomorrow will be average) and persistence forecasts (tomorrow will be the same as today).
I can tell you that skilled weather forecasts handily beat persistence forecasts overall. However, there are some specific circumstances where that isn't true.
One other interesting thing is that in general persistence forecasts are more accurate than climate forecasts out to about 3 days, when they become less accurate than climate. That says a little something about how long weather systems last.
Check out the sites at ForecastAdvisor.com and ForecastWatch.com for more.
-AceJust a note, MSN doesn't have any meteorologists on staff. The weather forecasts at weather.msn.com are provided by The Weather Channel.
-AceI was quite curious about weather forecast accuracy as well. So three years ago I started collecting weather forecasts from the primary providers (Accuweather, Weather Channel, NWS, CustomWeather, Intellicast, etc.) and comparing them to actual observations. It's tougher than you might imagine, and there are a lot of factors that need to go into creating usable verification statistics.
I have a public site with some statistics for about 800 locations in the US available at ForecastAdvisor.com. There is also a blog with more in depth analysis (like how do temperature forecasts fare relative to how deviant the actual temperature is...in other words how well do forecasts do the further away from normal the actual is, and how to forecasts fare the further out they forecast for, and how does forecast accuracy compare over time.).
ForecastWatch.com is used by meteorologists and professionals. Accuweather, The Weather Channel, and several private meteorological companies use this system to help them understand and improve their weather forecasts.
And a geek note: ForecastWatch.com runs on Quixote (a Python web framework), while ForecastAdvisor.com runs on Ruby on Rails. The back-end forecast and actual collection, and calculations are Python with a MySQL database. Both sites are close to migrating to Django, a new Python web framework and ORM.
-Ace
Instead of rehashing the Snood clone discussion, just visit Slashdot's article two years ago about Snood:
;-).
Snood, the Simple Game
So just read the previous discussion over, find what you thought was your original comment, and link. Saves typing
-Ace
The number of email chain letters, hoaxes, and urban legends that appear in my inbox is proof that the "citizen-journalists" concept won't work.
Fact checking? I can't even trust people to check snopes.com before forwarding!
-Ace
Its hilarious that Libertarians come up in this thread, as if putting one of them in power will automatically compel everyone to open up their wallets voluntarially.
It won't. But if it is a cause that people won't voluntarily fund, is it worth funding?
Before you claim that taxes are whats keeping everyone from doing this now, what about the tax deduction for donations?
You do realize that the deduction is on income, not on tax, which means that a $100 donation means $30 less tax (or thereabouts), not $100 less tax?
With a Libertarian President everyone could give to their favorite charity:
The Greeens could give to the organic farm commune
The Democrats could give to the abortion clinic
The Republicans could give to Halliburton
And everyone would be happy and live in peaceful harmony, and every four years it would be no big deal because it wouldn't matter so awful much.
Vote Badnarik!
-Ace
it is the God-fearing liberal Democrats like John Kerry that best exemplify the self-sacrifice and social compassion Jesus had
No. I don't call forcing money from other people to ease their conciences exemplifying Jesus.
Kerry and Edwards are multi-millioniares. They want to spend your money for "social compassion and self-sacrifice", not theirs. Because they don't trust you with your own money to do the same.
Vote Badnarik.
-Ace
The greater good of the overall population is to not have power concentrated in the hands of a few. Because of the concentration of money at the Federal level, that is why there is so much riding on this, and each election. I would rather live in a voluntary society, where each individual was free to vote with each dollar they spend, saved, or gave. The American people are a generous people (look at how much they gave after 9/11). It is ashame that so much is wasted on bureaucracy. Money is power. Power corrupts. And 2 TRILLION dollars corrupts a lot. Our federal bureaucracy has misplaced BILLIONS, made Bernie Ebbers look like Mother Teresa, and yet we tolerate it because we have no choice. We do have a choice! Libertarian Michael Badnarik is the only anti-war, pro-America, eliminate the deficit and reduce the waste of government candidate. And he is on the ballot in all but 1 or 2 states...far more than any other third party. Let Badnarik debate! -Ace
Younger people don't want to get shot at in a war that most believe, and firmly, never should have started because it was started with a president lying...
So I suppose that they are supporting Kerry because Kerry has publicly stated that he will add 40,000 troops to the Army. As a volunteer Army, where will these 40,000 troops come from?
As for Bush, who would you rather have in prison now, Saddam Hussein, or Osama bin Laden? Bush's "adventure" in Iraq has cost over 1,000 Americans their lives, and we are no closer to punishing the 9/11 murderers than we were three years ago.
The government which governs best, governs least. The only anti-war, pro-American Defense (not Offense), let you run your own life candidate is Libertarian Michael Badnarik. He will be on the ballot on all but 1 or 2 states.
Let Badnarik debate!
-Ace