Objectively intelligent.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Holy smokes, I hit "refresh" and the site went from showing ~ten green states to showing ~forty. It now says: "4/26 model update: new Rt graphs reflect corrections for the amount of testing done over time in any given state. An increase or decrease in testing should not affect accuracy of Rt values in the future. This correction has significantly improved Rt values in most states."

I hope things are that much better, but that's pretty huge change in the model....

Tn being good is weird?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

That'd be ideal, but as I'm playing with a handful of really bad cards, the best I could offer was Pence. He at least sounds sane when he speaks and tries to be inclusive and unifying.

Maybe this jars us out of polarization? Perhaps by having to travel a moderate, middle road somewhat together, at great common risk, people stop politicizing everything?

My wife and I have been part of a group of people discussing this stuff. The crowd of of about 500 friends is widely varied (Randian nuts to AOC style progressives). Almost everyone is polite in the back and forth and recognizes that we need a sensible plan. No one has dared to get political.

Gives me some hope an angry moderate insurgency can compel the people in charge to act like fucking adults.

I don’t know what could more clearly demonstrate that middle of the road do nothingism is not the answer. A point you’ve, correctly, made repeatedly in recent years.

This is a real world demonstration that government matters and should be affirmatively working to improve people’s lives. Health care tied to employment is bullshit in a pandemic depression. Workers left to fend for themselves is bullshit in a pandemic depression. Monopoly left unchecked, and left facing not even small scale retail competition in a lockdown is bullshit.

If this isn’t making you a democratic socialist, you’re not human.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Mi is #1 and we have open liquor stores!!!!

Those numbers are weird in a variety of ways. Not saying it’s wrong, but surprising.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Holy smokes, I hit "refresh" and the site went from showing ~ten green states to showing ~forty. It now says: "4/26 model update: new Rt graphs reflect corrections for the amount of testing done over time in any given state. An increase or decrease in testing should not affect accuracy of Rt values in the future. This correction has significantly improved Rt values in most states."

I hope things are that much better, but that's pretty huge change in the model....

Holy crap, we're second best?

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

Those numbers are weird in a variety of ways. Not saying it’s wrong, but surprising.

Well the factor can’t be accurate w/o testing etc. but for me, now, it’s like being in the upper decks of the Titanic thinking, “the lower decks are dead but I bet we survive.” Let me enjoy for now?

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Adder

Those numbers are weird in a variety of ways. Not saying it’s wrong, but surprising.

Entire state, not population centers which make a difference.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Icky Thump

Entire state, not population centers which make a difference.

let RT and me enjoy our wins, I mean fuck.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

I don’t know what could more clearly demonstrate that middle of the road do nothingism is not the answer. A point you’ve, correctly, made repeatedly in recent years.

This is a real world demonstration that government matters and should be affirmatively working to improve people’s lives. Health care tied to employment is bullshit in a pandemic depression. Workers left to fend for themselves is bullshit in a pandemic depression. Monopoly left unchecked, and left facing not even small scale retail competition in a lockdown is bullshit.

If this isn’t making you a democratic socialist, you’re not human.

I’m probably leaning there. This can’t continue. We’re going to sell the country to P/E. That’s objectively obscene.

And yet all of us, but maybe Icky, kind of contribute to that result?

I can’t be adverse to survival of the fittest. But no
decent man punches down. These instances should destroy zombie companies.

However, those companies had few on the payroll anyway. Their death just fucks sovereign wealth funds and domestic institutionals, no?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Holy smokes, I hit "refresh" and the site went from showing ~ten green states to showing ~forty. It now says: "4/26 model update: new Rt graphs reflect corrections for the amount of testing done over time in any given state. An increase or decrease in testing should not affect accuracy of Rt values in the future. This correction has significantly improved Rt values in most states."

I hope things are that much better, but that's pretty huge change in the model....

It happens. GGG corrected me on virus enhancement vs. degradation via mutation earlier. I was wrong, and consequently have rethought assumptions based on the facts on which he proved me wrong.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

let RT and me enjoy our wins, I mean fuck.

Talking about NY. NYC would have been off the chart.

[Icky Thump]

Few cases of outdoor transmission in China

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

let RT and me enjoy our wins, I mean fuck.

I'm suspicious of the raw data that is based on. Testing really isn't that robust yet and how much testing is being done and how and to whom is inconsistent between states. Still, I'd rather be where MI and TX.

I think that also will reflect in part when the virus hit different places. People who have had the virus for a full cycle are more likely to have spread it to more people - you just have more days to do the spreading. On the other hand, as more and more people get it, assuming they develop immunity to it after getting it, the ability for someone to spread will decline.

I'm fascinated by the whole concept of superspreaders. It looks like some people are just really extraordinary at spreading it. A superspreader or two in a small state can also make a difference.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

I'm suspicious of the raw data that is based on. Testing really isn't that robust yet and how much testing is being done and how and to whom is inconsistent between states. Still, I'd rather be where MI and TX.

I think that also will reflect in part when the virus hit different places. People who have had the virus for a full cycle are more likely to have spread it to more people - you just have more days to do the spreading. On the other hand, as more and more people get it, assuming they develop immunity to it after getting it, the ability for someone to spread will decline.

I'm fascinated by the whole concept of superspreaders. It looks like some people are just really extraordinary at spreading it. A superspreader or two in a small state can also make a difference.

This whole disease is just weird. Flareups with major repercussions in some places with what seems like just one point of contact, and in others where it should have spread like wildfire, it's manageable or crickets. Physiologic response all over the place, every system.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

This whole disease is just weird. Flareups with major repercussions in some places with what seems like just one point of contact, and in others where it should have spread like wildfire, it's manageable or crickets. Physiologic response all over the place, every system.

It's really reminiscent of hanging out with folks tackling AIDs back in the 90s, who were part baffled and part fascinated with what was going on.

The last few years 80%+ of the biotechs I've worked with have been cancer related, and working with those often seems more like we're working on engineering tasks - they know they can solve a problem, they understand the different issues at play, and they're just optimizing their solutions - than true discovery. This feels more like discovery. There are a couple scientists I deal with who are really charged up trying to figure it out.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

It's really reminiscent of hanging out with folks tackling AIDs back in the 90s, who were part baffled and part fascinated with what was going on.

The last few years 80%+ of the biotechs I've worked with have been cancer related, and working with those often seems more like we're working on engineering tasks - they know they can solve a problem, they understand the different issues at play, and they're just optimizing their solutions - than true discovery. This feels more like discovery. There are a couple scientists I deal with who are really charged up trying to figure it out.

We have so many faculty members at all six schools looking at this. I don't remember a time where all of us were working together so closely for a common goal. Usually everyone is so siloed. And they are to some extent, but we actually have med school people talking to public health people. The bench science people with the transitional medicine people. The informatics people with nursing people. Which is something that should have been happening for forever but doesn't. I hope this part stays afterwards.

ETA: Our IRB is reviewing 80 Covid related protocols right now.