That little kid that was shot due to road rage recently. That’s how bad commutes are. People who insist we go back to the office have blood on their hands.
The same can and often has been said of cocaine. Not that the two are the same, but everything you said is the same, vast majority have no problems, it’s great, you’ll love it etc....
Sure but it’s all about quantifying that accurately so that it can be compared to for example better building ventilation. If, hypothetically, better ventilation had 100x the effect of mask wearing, then focusing attention on masks would be counter productive no? Make no mistake I’m pro mask but mostly for psychological, ethical and economic reasons. I feel their benefits in terms of personal protection are vastly overstated, often in bad faith by those with a desire to impact other people’s behavior albeit with the best of intentions.
Exactly. For personal protection you use n95 or better and know it’s not perfect. If you don’t care about personal protection but want to reduce spread in a community then getting large groups to wear any face covering will help, but not nearly as much as social distancing which renders masks meaningless. For community spread, again not personal safety, it’s best to just stay home altogether. Masks are like pulling out during sex, a very imperfect way to compensate for bad behavior (not social distancing).
Even good medical masks didn’t protect Li Wenliang. There was always agreement about well fitted n95 but we’re told, even by your linked article not to use those. Sorry but this seems like politics not science. Obviously if you layer enough masks you can almost get to n95 levels of protection but why not just use an n95 at that point?
Some muddled thinking up in this thread. Testing is good for code implementation but the risk for code such as this mostly lies in untestable aspects like the assumptions built into certain types of statistical routines and measurement/definition problems. The only answer for these issues is independent replication. Software thinking emphasizes reusing code, but science should want the opposite. Replication really matters, even if we don’t want to accept that inconvenient fact. Great work with perfect code will fail to replicate and not because there were problems with the initial work, it’s statistically certain.
Soft power and American exceptionalism; like apple pie with ice cream, always somehow greater than the sum of the parts. The reality is that our soft power is moderated (mediated?) by the narratives exported by the couple of big media companies that dominate our airwaves (and thoughts.) These narratives have intentionally not, worked to undermine American soft power while promoting the soft power of international organizations like the WHO. Any discussion of soft power that omits the media is hopelessly incomplete. The soft power is being reallocated by our elites, because it was their power to begin with.
They were way too lax with lending to marginal applicants and that caused the 2008 collapse. I’m sure the real estate industry would love to go back to dodgy loans to those who cannot pay them back because they make more profit that way. I believe there should be stricter credit requirements, coupled with higher taxes on secondary residences and investment real estate. It’s predatory lending otherwise.
The costs of commuting are hard to measure. It’s not home vs office so much as office with extremely stressful and increasingly dangerous 10-15 hours a week commute that makes work less productive due to cognitive and psychological carry over effects. On the other hand working from home leads to isolation and suicide. Modern life is treacherous.
This is all exactly correct. What too often is left out of these discussions is the labor pool and incentives. Too many cooks in the kitchen, because there are incentives to keep adding more cooks, as though increasing the researcher labor supply were a goal in itself, rather what it truly is, an obstacle to progress. Eternal September comes to academia too, a side effect of scale.
This seems really obvious. People demand citations for bold claims, precisely because those claims are hard to believe.
The problem is that some fields don’t do replication studies. In such fields these highly cited papers with dubious findings are never debunked, because you know economists to pick on one specific group, don’t do replication studies.
It’s true too that 4 out of 5 scrum masters will lament the bothersome dearth of experienced scrumee programmers. Never a shortage of scrum masters, or ceos or vc or debt. But labor you can arbitrage for 10x profits are always hard to find domestically.
“ turned out the virus did come from a lab, there is a risk that the already Sinophobic political climate in the U.S. and elsewhere would get significantly worse”
It’s a scare word and has always been. Like “conspiracy theory” it’s purpose is to stop thought and prevent thinking. It’s easily replaced with real words with concrete meanings. Are mass shootings terrorism? Since it’s widely used scare word to describe generally “bad acts towards groups of people” I think ransomware fits, but so does a lot of graffiti. Maybe it’s better to quibble over terms than to talk about how Bitcoin is responsible.
I’d say that what they did was right. The noble lie is by definition noble. The news media acting as (not always unwitting) accomplices is the real problem.
Look at the post above yours. Yes, some want to make the case that laws on the whole are essentially oppressive. Whether of not foucault made that case precisely, or whatever, is totally irrelevant if it’s what most people actual mean, viz that laws are the tools by which the powerless are oppressed.
Musk likes to manipulate Tesla’s value in subtle plausibly deniable ways. He tweets, it dips massively and then dip buying momentum shoots it back up higher. He’s gamified tsla stock buying for the retail investment Reddit crowd.