For one thing, there’s two competing weather services providing the data to countless apps in the US and one of them has more money to throw around than the other.
The weather channel has better weather predictions overall than Apple’s own weather app, as rated by Forecastadvisor.com, but is not as accurate as Accuweather is although it’s used in more apps.
Weather is about tracking and predictions. It’s never going to be completely 100% correct. But taking a hodgepodge of information from several prediction services means you’re more likely to be less accurate overall despite what people may think.
If all the private company weather services were only getting their info from the NOAA we wouldn’t have such varying results most of the time. Which is basically my point. The results vary because they don’t just use the NOAA’s data and predictions. The second one is actually the US Armed Forces.
Unless I misunderstood what you said, that’s not it either. 50% chance of rain means exactly that: according to their forecast models, there is a 50% change it will rain. Snopes did a writeup of this.
Reading Snopes will give you plenty. Read the articles - and a lot of them use weasel-wording to push the result they want.
I don’t have the exact article on hand at the moment, but an example would be someone claiming that clear-cutting 1000 acres of trees would destroy [X]^3 of CO2 reduction; and then Snopes will “fact check” it by saying they aren’t cutting down 1000 acres of trees this year. Often times they’ll ‘debunk’ something that sounds like the claim, but isn’t the actual claim.
The statement “there’s a 40% chance of rain at any given point at any given time in the forecast area/period” is an average over both area and time.
Many different actual distributions of rain could result in that average, including a 100% chance of it raining 100% of the time in 40% of the are or a 40% chance of it raining in 100% of the time in 100% of the area, and a 100% chance of it raining 40% of the time in 100% of the area. Real distributions are typically messier than that.
I’m not a fan of crypto but between resistive heating which gives no return, and mining heat which gives unprofitable return, it makes more sense to get your heating from mining if you already have the computer for it. The only question is whether it’s financially better than a heat pump short term.
And of course this only really works for one room so it’s not a complete solution.
i started being mindful of eating more fibre a year or so ago, and dear god it’s amazing to be able to just trust my bowels and barely ever have to think about type 2 toilet visits.
This may sound like heresy, but I think some games are better on handheld consoles and some are better on the PC. Really depends on the vibe you’re wanting.
StarCraft for example. Definitely better on PC, almost impossible to play on console.
Mario Kart or Zelda or many of the Nintendo games. I just either want to play them with friends or just chill on my bed and play them. Sure you could make some kind of PC setup to work the same way, but consoles are very user friendly.
Steam deck. I’ve been floored by how great it is, and with a dock it’s easy to set up with multiple controllers or a mouse and keyboard. Literally all the benefits of a (handheld) console, and all the benefits of a PC, including the ability to play a huge backlog of old console games.
I switched to playing subnautica on steam deck because the full PC setup was too much for my phobias. Now I can actually enjoy the game instead of spiking my panic. But like Factorio, what a mess on controller imo it’s so much better with kb/m and the ability to quickly switch windows to look stuff up. I used to be team PC 100% but since I got the deck I’ve been branching out and even some PC games are just better on it
kbin.life
Oldest