Objectively intelligent.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

The disease is unavoidable, I think. From what I see, it can be delayed, which gives one an opportunity to avail himself of daily improving therapies. Or perhaps a vaccine. But I don’t have much faith that the latter will be available within any reasonable timeframe.

The death rate is decreasing, and not just because it is hitting young people predominantly.

Of course you should try to avoid or delay acquiring this as long as humanly possible. But you must also be reasonable in doing so. Being a hermit is not an option. That is no life. One has to measure the quality of existence against the duration.

The people who are doing stupid stuff are doing it because they think, if x is safe then y is safe. The people who are smarter are thinking, I only want to take so much risk, so if I'm going to do x this week then maybe I don't do y.

I think this is seen as a manichean issue because society is tribal lysing over everything else, and this is just one more way people can pick sides and be on either team a or team B. People want to say, “I believe in science!” as a way of saying, “I reject Trump and anti-science!” as a good bit of status and virtue signaling, like almost everything else we hear in the media.

I think you are responding to types of media that present "both sides" and play up political conflict. In real life, there is a much wider assortment of views. I was in Home Depot a few weeks ago and a guy (with a mask on) was getting in my space -- insistent standing next to me on top of one of those decals on the floor telling people to space. When I asked him to give me some room, he started telling me about how everyone is brainwashed and hysterical. Whatever, pal. He wasn't Trumpy, he just needed to be better than everyone else in his own way.

But there is a middle road that employs science and pragmatism - that attempts to balance diligence with economic realities. And it is the middle road the silent majority of Americans are following. Wear a mask, avoid bars and gyms, and socially distance.

It would be nice if the silent majority of Americans were doing that. There are a lot of places where no one is masking.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

The people who are doing stupid stuff are doing it because they think, if x is safe then y is safe. The people who are smarter are thinking, I only want to take so much risk, so if I'm going to do x this week then maybe I don't do y.

If x is safe and y is not, you never, any week, do y. But go ahead and do x all you like.

I think you are responding to types of media that present "both sides" and play up political conflict. In real life, there is a much wider assortment of views. I was in Home Depot a few weeks ago and a guy (with a mask on) was getting in my space -- insistent standing next to me on top of one of those decals on the floor telling people to space. When I asked him to give me some room, he started telling me about how everyone is brainwashed and hysterical. Whatever, pal. He wasn't Trumpy, he just needed to be better than everyone else in his own way.

He's not distancing. Failure to distance is, to use the above analogy, a y behavior.

It would be nice if the silent majority of Americans were doing that. There are a lot of places where no one is masking.

And natural selection is and shall continue to deliver a verdict to them. But I entirely disagree that most Americans or even more than 1/4 of Americans are refusing to wear masks. It's a slice of Trumpland engaging in that behavior. If Trump's base is 35% of voters, and we can thus extrapolate that it is 35% of America generally, I'd generously estimate 1/2 of Trump's base is anti-mask. (But 100% of those who'll show up at rallies.) That's 17.5% of society. The rest of us - even most rational Trump voters - are wearing masks.

I travel through heavy red areas and everyone is wearing masks, and most of these people are Trump voters.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

If x is safe and y is not, you never, any week, do y. But go ahead and do x all you like.

That's exactly the wrong way to think about it. It's not a binary world, where things are categorically safe or unsafe. There is some risk to, say, eating at a restaurant, or going to the DMV, or having a kid go to school, or getting a haircut. The way to think about it is NOT: well, it's safe for my kid to go to school, so it must be safe to do all those things -- I'm going to do them all. It's more like, I going to get a haircut today, so I'm not going to compound the risk by eating out and going to the DMV. If you want to balance COVID risk and living your life, you have to think about what cumulative risk you're willing to take, not just apply a simple go/no-go heuristic for everything in your life. Too many people doing the latter.

He's not distancing. Failure to distance is, to use the above analogy, a y behavior.

Yes, rather. My point was that he wasn't being tribal or Trumpy. Your media diet may feature two opposing tribes all the time, but people are a little more complicated.

And natural selection is and shall continue to deliver a verdict to them.

That's a lovely sentiment, but it missed the point in a way that the media (for example, the local news here) is constantly missing the point. Those people are not only taking risk on themselves, they are endangering other people around them. If the only consequences were for themselves and their hypothetical offspring, it's easier to think in libertarian terms, but the issue here is that in a pandemic, sick people make other people sick.

But I entirely disagree that most Americans or even more than 1/4 of Americans are refusing to wear masks. It's a slice of Trumpland engaging in that behavior. If Trump's base is 35% of voters, and we can thus extrapolate that it is 35% of America generally, I'd generously estimate 1/2 of Trump's base is anti-mask. (But 100% of those who'll show up at rallies.) That's 17.5% of society. The rest of us - even most rational Trump voters - are wearing masks.

I travel through heavy red areas and everyone is wearing masks, and most of these people are Trump voters.

I drove through Utah and Arizona not too long ago. Didn't see anyone wearing masks in Utah. There were some in Arizona, but by far the exceptions rather than there rule.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

That's exactly the wrong way to think about it. It's not a binary world, where things are categorically safe or unsafe.

Incorrect. Gyms are unsafe. I deem school unsafe. I'm affluent. Neither matters to me. YMMV if you weren't as lucky, or you were more lucky (there are very safe schools for a price).

There is some risk to, say, eating at a restaurant, or going to the DMV, or having a kid go to school, or getting a haircut. The way to think about it is NOT: well, it's safe for my kid to go to school, so it must be safe to do all those things -- I'm going to do them all.

I agree. But I didn't say that. We're disagreeing about how to disagree with binary thinking.

It's more like, I going to get a haircut today, so I'm not going to compound the risk by eating out and going to the DMV. If you want to balance COVID risk and living your life, you have to think about what cumulative risk you're willing to take, not just apply a simple go/no-go heuristic for everything in your life. Too many people doing the latter.

That's one approach. I think my approach, which is to eschew high risk elective activities while engaging liberally in low to no risk activities, and engaging in high risk activities only when required or the cost-benefit warrants it, is preferable. We've different paths to similar ends.

Yes, rather. My point was that he wasn't being tribal or Trumpy. Your media diet may feature two opposing tribes all the time, but people are a little more complicated.

You and I may be. The person you met was behaving badly, in terms of his own risk and risk to others.

That's a lovely sentiment, but it missed the point in a way that the media (for example, the local news here) is constantly missing the point. Those people are not only taking risk on themselves, they are endangering other people around them. If the only consequences were for themselves and their hypothetical offspring, it's easier to think in libertarian terms, but the issue here is that in a pandemic, sick people make other people sick.

You're not going to solve that, so it's pointless to dwell on it. All one can do is avoid them.

I drove through Utah and Arizona not too long ago. Didn't see anyone wearing masks in Utah. There were some in Arizona, but by far the exceptions rather than there rule.

I have friends in Utah and will be there. My friends who moved there from CT will be wearing masks, and we will be visiting places where people are largely outside and wearing masks when not. I may be fine. I may not be fine. I may have had it and get it again. I may relapse (a friend of mine had that experience). I will wear a mask, I will avoid people, and in that regard, I will have acted decently, respectably, and sensibly. That is all one can do.

And if I die young, I'll regret seeing my family in its older years. But it'll be a gift to my wife. And let's be honest -- we've all had a better run than most of us deserve. And most of it's been luck. I have no business having had the life I've had. That's probably the only self awareness I have, but it's a pretty essential variant of it. And I recommend imbibing it. Imagine how lucky we are. How dare we be neurotic except in regard to protecting others.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

That's exactly the wrong way to think about it. It's not a binary world, where things are categorically safe or unsafe. There is some risk to, say, eating at a restaurant, or going to the DMV, or having a kid go to school, or getting a haircut. The way to think about it is NOT: well, it's safe for my kid to go to school, so it must be safe to do all those things -- I'm going to do them all. It's more like, I going to get a haircut today, so I'm not going to compound the risk by eating out and going to the DMV. If you want to balance COVID risk and living your life, you have to think about what cumulative risk you're willing to take, not just apply a simple go/no-go heuristic for everything in your life. Too many people doing the latter.

Right and also why trick or treating isn’t “safe” despite a single outdoor brief exchange at the door being “safe.” Everything has risk and each risk is cumulative.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

Right and also why trick or treating isn’t “safe” despite a single outdoor brief exchange at the door being “safe.” Everything has risk and each risk is cumulative.

Incremental introduction does not build up viral load over time. If the viral load of one exposure is too low to cause issue, a subsequent low viral load is not stacked on the prior one to create adequate load for reaction.

If I go to the store every day, my cumulative risk of getting hit with a significant dose increases. But it's an outlier -- the possibility a person with it sneezes on me. My repeat visits from day to day do not create an adequate viral load for infection because I am incrementally adding little amounts of virus day to day.

OTOH, massive viral load from significant repeat exposures such as those which killed HC professionals early on in the pandemic do stack. But only because they came in enormous doses quickly over short periods of time.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

So what should Rudy's next film be named?

Played by the Russians
Hard Drive, 2020
Kumpromat

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

So what should Rudy's next film be named?

Played by the Russians
Hard Drive, 2020
Kumpromat

Look at the "borat's daughter eats a baby" scene on youtube. movie looks great.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Incremental introduction does not build up viral load over time. If the viral load of one exposure is too low to cause issue, a subsequent low viral load is not stacked on the prior one to create adequate load for reaction.

If I go to the store every day, my cumulative risk of getting hit with a significant dose increases. But it's an outlier -- the possibility a person with it sneezes on me. My repeat visits from day to day do not create an adequate viral load for infection because I am incrementally adding little amounts of virus day to day.

OTOH, massive viral load from significant repeat exposures such as those which killed HC professionals early on in the pandemic do stack. But only because they came in enormous doses quickly over short periods of time.

Sort of.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...x.html#contact

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

If x is safe and y is not, you never, any week, do y. But go ahead and do x all you like.



He's not distancing. Failure to distance is, to use the above analogy, a y behavior.



And natural selection is and shall continue to deliver a verdict to them. But I entirely disagree that most Americans or even more than 1/4 of Americans are refusing to wear masks. It's a slice of Trumpland engaging in that behavior. If Trump's base is 35% of voters, and we can thus extrapolate that it is 35% of America generally, I'd generously estimate 1/2 of Trump's base is anti-mask. (But 100% of those who'll show up at rallies.) That's 17.5% of society. The rest of us - even most rational Trump voters - are wearing masks.

I travel through heavy red areas and everyone is wearing masks, and most of these people are Trump voters.

I went to a wedding a few weeks ago where NO ONE wore masks except the people in my family. 62 people. The ceremony was outdoors, but they wanted us to go inside for "the Grand Entrance" and then to eat at tables that were too close together.

Usually I prefer to skip the ceremony and go to the reception. This time, we hightailed out of there as soon as possible after the ceremony. Most of the people there were 20s-30s, but some older as well.

People aren't wearing masks. At least not here.

Cases are lower now than they were this summer, but they're slightly increasing every week and officials are getting concerned.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

I went to a wedding a few weeks ago where NO ONE wore masks except the people in my family. 62 people. The ceremony was outdoors, but they wanted us to go inside for "the Grand Entrance" and then to eat at tables that were too close together.

Usually I prefer to skip the ceremony and go to the reception. This time, we hightailed out of there as soon as possible after the ceremony. Most of the people there were 20s-30s, but some older as well.

People aren't wearing masks. At least not here.

Cases are lower now than they were this summer, but they're slightly increasing every week and officials are getting concerned.

That's frightening.

A while back I went to a wake for a hospital administrator I knew. It looked like everyone there was ready for surgery. Masks, Shields, Gloves.

On the other hand, I walk by restaurants and see people with no PPE at all just hanging out, pulling chairs close.

One group knows what they're doing and what a pandemic is. The other, not so much.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

I went to a wedding a few weeks ago where NO ONE wore masks except the people in my family. 62 people. The ceremony was outdoors, but they wanted us to go inside for "the Grand Entrance" and then to eat at tables that were too close together.

Usually I prefer to skip the ceremony and go to the reception. This time, we hightailed out of there as soon as possible after the ceremony. Most of the people there were 20s-30s, but some older as well.

People aren't wearing masks. At least not here.

Cases are lower now than they were this summer, but they're slightly increasing every week and officials are getting concerned.

I watched my uncle’s funeral on live stream outside the funeral parlor. People wore masks when they were inside, but took them off as soon as they got outside and then stood close together in groups and talked and sat at tables (reasonably spaced at least) and ate. Pretty sure it was all in compliance with WI law and everyone was trying to be safe, but I sure would have preferred an outside ceremony in the field next door.

That said, I hugged my aunt and cousin, who would have been the super spreaders had there been and outbreak. As far as I know there was not.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Adder

I watched my uncle’s funeral on live stream outside the funeral parlor. People wore masks when they were inside, but took them off as soon as they got outside and then stood close together in groups and talked and sat at tables (reasonably spaced at least) and ate. Pretty sure it was all in compliance with WI law and everyone was trying to be safe, but I sure would have preferred an outside ceremony in the field next door.

That said, I hugged my aunt and cousin, who would have been the super spreaders had there been and outbreak. As far as I know there was not.

Compliant with Wi law? It isn't law, but here we have "no masks outside IF you can distance." Doesn't everywhere have that?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Compliant with Wi law? It isn't law, but here we have "no masks outside IF you can distance." Doesn't everywhere have that?

It was awhile ago. And Wisconsin is a mess.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

I watched my uncle’s funeral on live stream outside the funeral parlor. People wore masks when they were inside, but took them off as soon as they got outside and then stood close together in groups and talked and sat at tables (reasonably spaced at least) and ate. Pretty sure it was all in compliance with WI law and everyone was trying to be safe, but I sure would have preferred an outside ceremony in the field next door.

That said, I hugged my aunt and cousin, who would have been the super spreaders had there been and outbreak. As far as I know there was not.

I don’t wear masks outside unless I’m walking in a crowded area or otherwise in close proximity to people I don’t know are safe.

We have a pretty tightknit group of friends who have dinner together regularly, but no one hugs or gets too close, and dinner is always outside.

I tend to be a bit standoffish anyway, so this whole distancing thing works really well for me. There are certain people I like to hug hello, and kiss. It’s a small crowd. I like “Heismaning” other people with the fistbump, particularly those people who try to hug each other to demonstrate they think the virus is overhyped. (There is a crowd of people who will hug and kiss each other in front of you to broadcast that they think it’s a hoax. I think they think it’s making a statement. And I guess it is… I view them as idiots.)