Red Mosquito

doug rr wrote:

wease wrote:According to the failing NYT, our county/city it the fourth fastest growth in the nation. We’re doubling every 11 days. Good thing the whole state removes all restrictions tomorrow.

what buffet are you taking the family to tomorrow night?

Oooooh. Good idea.

Obviously Ci-Cis Pizza.

doug rr wrote:

wease wrote:According to the failing NYT, our county/city it the fourth fastest growth in the nation. We’re doubling every 11 days. Good thing the whole state removes all restrictions tomorrow.

what buffet are you taking the family to tomorrow night?

doug rr wrote:

doug rr with the Q & the A!

Rob wrote:

macphisto wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:I'm just tired of everyone acting like this is going to be fixed. It's not.

Thank you. It's vaccine or herd immunity (by letting it run its course while protecting the most vulnerable). I'm not aware of a third option.

**squirts hand sanitizer on crotch**

Sincere question for you (and others) - what does "herd immunity while protecting the vulnerable" mean? It is clear to me how a vaccine solves this. I also believe (hope) that a therapeutic might come online at some point and provide much needed relief. But I still don't understand the herd immunity argument. It seems to suggest that the vulnerable crowd endure a lockdown state indefinitely (a year or two longer) so the rest of us can continue on. Maybe that is the best of a bunch of bad options, but is that how we're supposed to see it? It's actually a shitload of people, including a group called "grandparents." So I'm not sure this is an acceptable path in real life.

I read a couple more articles tonight, and it turns out we’re fucked. Sorry everybody.

macphisto wrote:

Rob wrote:

macphisto wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:I'm just tired of everyone acting like this is going to be fixed. It's not.

Thank you. It's vaccine or herd immunity (by letting it run its course while protecting the most vulnerable). I'm not aware of a third option.

**squirts hand sanitizer on crotch**

Sincere question for you (and others) - what does "herd immunity while protecting the vulnerable" mean? It is clear to me how a vaccine solves this. I also believe (hope) that a therapeutic might come online at some point and provide much needed relief. But I still don't understand the herd immunity argument. It seems to suggest that the vulnerable crowd endure a lockdown state indefinitely (a year or two longer) so the rest of us can continue on. Maybe that is the best of a bunch of bad options, but is that how we're supposed to see it? It's actually a shitload of people, including a group called "grandparents." So I'm not sure this is an acceptable path in real life.

I read a couple more articles tonight, and it turns out we’re fucked. Sorry everybody.

Any links you wanna share?

I read something today that said something like 50 percent of people commenting on Corona virus on Twitter are bots.

verb_to_trust wrote:I read something today that said something like 50 percent of people commenting on Corona virus on Twitter are bots.

That still seems low.

Our $1,500/ftnt JobKeeper package for all permanent employees in businesses with substantially reduced turnover came with a $130 billion price tag when it was introduced. Turns out our Treasury Department stuffed up the maths and now it's only going to cost $70 billion. Nice job, Treasury. Fills me with confidence that you release one of the biggest one-off social support programs in our history and totally fuck-up the basic accounting for it.

Bonus we are spending less, for sure, but really? A $60 billion accounting error?

Yet they grill me over a $350 deduction at tax time...

Oh! And I see now Trump is sacking various Inspector Generals across the supposedly "independent" government watchdog 'Pandemic Response Accountability Committee', 5 gone in 6 weeks apparently.

Ah - who needs independent watchdogs anyway? Trump's got it fully sorted - those guys would just cramp his style.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-22/ ... s/12269124

verb_to_trust wrote:I read something today that said something like 50 percent of people commenting on Corona virus on Twitter are bots.

Fact: In terms of global impact, Twitter is worse than 4chan ever was.

Bi_3 wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:I read something today that said something like 50 percent of people commenting on Corona virus on Twitter are bots.

Fact: In terms of global impact, Twitter is worse than 4chan ever was.

Never mind on my first response. I thought this was a reference to an article out a few days ago.

Reading the original announcement, two things jump out: one, there’s a consistent ideological slant to the fake news they coordinate:

- amplifying ”reopen America" calls
- claiming exaggerated / false death tolls (also includes: hospitals being filled with mannequins)
- pushing the idea that coronavirus is linked to 5G towers.

It seems like a really problematic situation for us as a nation, if we can’t even say out loud that these coordinated misinformation efforts heavily target the same group that has been conditioned not to believe actual journalism or research when it disagrees with them. If we can’t say out loud that distrust of professional reporting is exactly what makes these people susceptible to manipulation....the bot owners clearly know it....then the platform won’t matter. Ban them on twitter and they’ll find another way to reach them. Twitter doesn’t make them useful idiots, it’s just another in a line of delivery mediums. Cultivated distrust of journalism and science is what makes them susceptible, and we avoid saying that because we all understand that cultivated distrust of journalism and science is a partisan problem.

And two, it should be interesting to see how the same group’s analysis of Facebook goes.

The researchers have begun to analyze Facebook, Reddit, and YouTube to understand how disinformation spreads between platforms. The work is still in the early stages, but it’s already revealed some unexpected patterns. For one, the researchers have found that many disinformation stories come from regular websites or blogs before being picked up on different social platforms and amplified. Different types of stories also have different provenance patterns. Those claiming that the virus is a bioweapon, for example, mostly come from so-called “black news” sites, fake news pages designed to spread disinformation that are often run outside the US. In contrast, the “reopen America” rhetoric mostly comes from blogs and Facebook pages run in the US.

I rest my case?

The anti-malaria drug that Trump is promoting and actually freaking taking, has been found to increase the risk of death by 45% in a study done of almost 100,000 coronavirus patients on all continents.

Trump is not taking HCQ. He also hasn't opened a Bible in his entire life. He doesn't have a problem with abortion. He stands for NOTHING. His only ideology is Trump.

knee tunes wrote:The anti-malaria drug that Trump is promoting and actually freaking taking, has been found to increase the risk of death by 45% in a study done of almost 100,000 coronavirus patients on all continents.

Good. Hopefully he really is taking it and will add to that statistic.

verb_to_trust wrote:Trump is not taking HCQ. He also hasn't opened a Bible in his entire life. He doesn't have a problem with abortion. He stands for NOTHING. His only ideology is Trump.

Sometimes, you just hit it right square on the head.

so did we build anymore hospitals over these last 2 months

96583UP wrote:so did we build anymore hospitals over these last 2 months

We bankrupted some. Does that count?

verb_to_trust wrote:

96583UP wrote:so did we build anymore hospitals over these last 2 months

We bankrupted some. Does that count?

so, you didn’t build any