Man... I clicked on the link and skimmed the headings... for a moment I was convinced this will be about geopolitics.
1,790 karma · joined August 18, 2010
So the important question is: should "we" take the bet on that immunity escape? Or should we not take that chance?
My opinion is that we should act decisively to avoid the bet.... but the UK government clearly feels lucky.
Is it "there is no substitute for judgement"??
Great questions, we will need some good answers soon. Not so much for the monkeys, but for AI.
Where did you get this from? According to Wikipedia, and most other sources, 70-80% of German military casualties were on the Eastern Front.
>The US footed a lot of the material costs needed for Europe and the USSR to stay in the fight...
More than 80% of the aid to USSR was delivered after the Battle of Stalingrad was won by the USSR, and the outcome of the war was pretty much settled.
>the USSR played a significant role
...far greater than what you are suggesting.
As an example, a 32" CRT with remote control (eg Sony Trinitron) cost about $1500-2000 back in 1997.
Today, you can buy a 32" TV for $85, delivered. And even though this will be "Brand X" and not Sony, it will have better picture quality, more functionality, be more reliable and use less power to boot.
Switzerland, Iceland, Luxmbourg, Belgium, Ireland, France, UK, Spain, Austria, Italy, Malta, Norway.
If you go by mean wealth on the other hand, only Switzerland is higher than the US. But that is not a measure of middle class wealth.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_pe...
No, it's not money, it's something else. "Build Culture" is a good name for it, whatever it is.
Either way, its 21% increase in energy consumed per mile in this case.
Unfortunately, the article does not say how the zinc oxide nanoparticles will help with being able to use solar/wind power to produce syngas.
In fact it is not clear how these nanoparticles could actually be used to make an industrial catalyst. Current catalysts also use nanoparticles - on a substrate with enormous surface area/volume ratio, but these nanoparticles are created on that substrate.
I am curious about what the researchers plan as the next step.
Absolutely wrong. And you are missing:
- lockdown reduction in suffering, due both to the acute phase of the disease and after effects
- No-lockdown-externalities, including damage to the economy if the disease is allowed to spread through the entire population
And perhaps most importantly:
- the risk that a huge reservoir of infected people will lead to repeat waves caused by mutations, and even worse that cross-species infection occurs (we already know cats and dogs can be infected - pigs and poultry could be next); then we risk flu-like antigenic shifts.
Put all this into the equation and I think the only thing we should be contemplating is how to eradicate the virus as soon as possible.
The extent of the measures taken to prevent further infections and the re-emergence of the epidemic are truly eye-opening.
- What if there are long term effects?
- What if it becomes a seasonal disease?
- What if the next mutation is more severe?
Each country should b a good global citizen, and put in its best effort to make sure the spread is as limited as possible.
SOME wells can be a little difficult to restart after a shut-in. This includes, for example, offshore wells which extract waxy crude - the crude can simply solidify in the pipe if allowed to cool down to ambient temperature. See link below. This is usually not a big problem for a planned shutdown, as the facility will take measures to prevent such a situation (eg flush the pipes with diesel right after shutdown).
I suspect the problem might be more difficult with some pipelines, as these may be impractical to flush.
https://www.khavaranparaffin.com/articles/161-wax-problems-i...
I do not agree on any single one of your numbered points.
1) "eradication is not possible" just does not follow from "this is a highly transmissible respiratory virus". "Eradication will be difficult" follows; but several countries have shown us that "eradication is entirely possible if proper measures are taken"
2) The purpose of lockdowns is to eradicate the virus. https://medium.com/@joschabach/flattening-the-curve-is-a-dea...
3) See 1.
So my position is that eradication is possible, and - given the possibility of multiple waves if the virus becomes endemic (large virus population --> increased chances of dangerous mutations) - it is vital that we give it a really good try.
The discussion should re-focus on how we go about eradicating the virus, while minimizing the damage to the economy. This article outlines an appropriate path forward: https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-th...
Which raises an interesting question: In what meaningful sense do these numbers exist? They are just out of reach as the non-definable real numbers...
No...if balance of payment is negative, that means they are pushing money out of the country. Presumably there is a corresponding flow of goods inward, so the "wealth" does not change as such.
The imported goods may of course be consumed (e.g. Swiss chocolate, movies), or put to productive use (e.g. a lathe, education), or just stored (e.g. gold).