This story in today's Guardian describes (in very vague terms) a new weather forecasting software/system release from Google's gen-AI people.
The closing paragraph acknowledges a potential issue with "edge cases," and quotes a climate scientist fearing a potential "Michael Fish moment." Apparently, in the weather forecasting world, this is quite famous - but famous enough for The Guardian to assume their readers will understand the reference?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Fish
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from lolcat@digipres.club
FWIW, I'm not complaining - I love this sort of thing! It's much more fun to think "Who the hell is Michael Fish, and what was his moment?!" than to have it spelled out.
Tangential: Boosterism seems to be in the nature of Tech reporting. Go back 100 years, and the wonders of leaded gasoline were being praised in every paper.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from lolcat@digipres.club
Oh, a link to the story!
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2024/dec/04/google-deepmind-predicts-weather-more-accurately-than-leading-system
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from lolcat@digipres.club
@lolcat here in The Netherlands we had a nuclear phase in the 1960s that worked like that I am told.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from bert_hubert@fosstodon.org
@bert_hubert
Don't recall ever giving much thought to Dutch nuclear energy policy until just now. According to Wikipedia, all the way back in the 1950s, a Dutch research program aimed to transition the nation to nuclear power in the 1960s - similar to many other global-North nations, I imagine.
Funny how your toot prompted another Wikipedia adventure. Also funny how your example (nuclear energy) is a mirror-ish image of fossil fuels and tetraethyl lead.
=> More informations about this toot | More toots from lolcat@digipres.club This content has been proxied by September (3851b).Proxy Information
text/gemini