Tell people they may have to stay 2 months more in lockdown what do you expect, positive comments?
If the most likely outcome is that 50-70% of the population gets infected anyway, then the goal shouldn't be to save lives. It should just be to keep a buffer of beds available in hospitals and to close only enough to keep that buffer. This is what NY is doing with their 30% hospital capacity buffer metric. The bay area has had plenty of hospital capacity and people can see that as a failure with the 50-70% assumption.
Of course, that all could be wrong, and we could save millions by continuing to be mostly closed. I'm not sure. But the change in tone could be people moving towards the first option.
What it has to do with my comment?
Data shows that most of the virus propagation happens inside and that, health wise, all that stay at home eating and watching TV will definitely have a cost on health, both body and mental, and still, a lot of people want the lockdown to continue.
Another of those instances where I don't understand my contemporaries I guess...