Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 373 posts

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#131

Post by growlist »

robocat wrote: post #99
black_puppydog wrote: post #15

I don't agree with the conclusion. We can scale down our economies and still maintain production of essentials by ` `drumroll` ` scaling back shit that nobody needs. Starting with an overblown healthcare admin system in the US, IMHO, but also including less inflammatory non-essential things like yet another range of plastic toys and luxury perfumes and and and. Essentially in this scenario, we should take this as an…

> scaling back shit that nobody needs The “shit” nobody needs is the main point of living: music, art, science, sharing, pets; the crap you desire versus the essentials. If we only got what we needed to survive (food, shelter) that would be a pointless and depressing life.

Oh come on! Hundreds of minor variations on the 'round blobby SUV with redundant angular surface forms' style; thousands of different variations on 'fat and water emulsified together with a dash of scent' for making your skin softer; fifty gorillion different types of shampoo - 'Because you're worth it!'.

I'm all for a Hayek/Friedman approach to the markets, but I think even they would consider above trivialities in comparison with things like a supportive family, spiritual nourishment, a shared culture, social stability, etc. etc. The market needs to be kept in perspective. If all of that (illusory) choice was vastly attenuated tomorrow, people would quickly adapt.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#132

Post by nickysielicki »

jonrimmer wrote: post #12

In this event, the solution will be the creation of a permanent, South Korea and China inspired infrastructure for testing, tracking and constraining infectious citizens by all developed countries. Regardless of the privacy and civil liberty concerns, I think that's where we'll eventually end up, and to your children it will one day seem crazy that a person with an infectious illness was once able to freely walk the…

No way. You’re not giving Americans enough credit.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#133

Post by Pepe1vo »

ohazi wrote: post #69
Arkhaine_kupo wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember reading they expect immunity to last as little as 6 months for Covid-19, found this paper about the SARS outbreak of 2002 which was also a type of corona virus, saying patients had an average immunity of 2 years. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2851497/

Wikipedia-grade non-biologist here, so again, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. As far as I'm aware, antibodies don't stick around after they're no longer needed... They're produced by B cells when an infection is detected, and after an initial infection, some B cells that learned how to make effective antibodies stick around in your body as "memory B cells" - these will produce the same antibodies again upon rei…

It's correct that the memory cells in your body will last a long time. However, (I think) what the parent is getting at is that within a relatively short amount of time the virus will have mutated just enough to evade detection by those memory cells.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#134

Post by jariel »

black_puppydog wrote: post #15

I don't agree with the conclusion. We can scale down our economies and still maintain production of essentials by ` `drumroll` ` scaling back shit that nobody needs. Starting with an overblown healthcare admin system in the US, IMHO, but also including less inflammatory non-essential things like yet another range of plastic toys and luxury perfumes and and and. Essentially in this scenario, we should take this as an…

None of this really has anything to do with solving the problem.

Living in permanent social distancing, waiting to die from 3rd or 4th infection ... is not a humane way to live.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#135

Post by robocat »

growlist wrote: post #131
robocat wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> scaling back shit that nobody needs The “shit” nobody needs is the main point of living: music, art, science, sharing, pets; the crap you desire versus the essentials. If we only got what we needed to survive (food, shelter) that would be a pointless and depressing life.

Oh come on! Hundreds of minor variations on the 'round blobby SUV with redundant angular surface forms' style; thousands of different variations on 'fat and water emulsified together with a dash of scent' for making your skin softer; fifty gorillion different types of shampoo - 'Because you're worth it!'. I'm all for a Hayek/Friedman approach to the markets, but I think even they would consider above trivialities in…

No-one should be deciding for others what should be important.

If I were a dictator, maybe I would think pets are pointless. Another person may think science is pointless.

I think the vast majority of what people want is wasteful, but who am I to tell others what their priorities should be?

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#136

Post by 101404 »

TheSpiceIsLife wrote: post #95
101404 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI could be possible in a closed society, but not if you are open for uncontrolled influx of people from outside your society. Because the offer "get free money" is just too good. There was the choice what to focus on, and we decided we wanted uncontrolled immigration. Fair choice, but the consequence is that UBI won't work anymore.

I’m not aware of any place that has a completely open boarder . What are you referring to here?

I am not aware that I claimed any place would have completely open border.

I am certain that you know what I am referring to, but want to avoid a serious discussion by playing with technicalities. No thanks.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#137

Post by timwaagh »

lbeltrame wrote: post #106
timwaagh wrote: post #5

I'm sure if china can shut people inside their houses to prevent spread, so can we. We just have to adopt a different attitude towards fundamental rights. Besides, medicine development seems to go rather quickly. I am sure it will be mostly dealt with in a years time.

> I am sure it will be mostly dealt with in a years time. What do you mean exactly? If you mean locking people up in their homes for a whole year, I think this will have not only economic, but also deep social impacts.

Yes there will be deep social and economic impacts. We wont get out of this unscathed. I think that's obvious. No i don't mean locking people in for a year. That measure should be localized and temporary.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#138

Post by timwaagh »

woahitsraj wrote: post #6
timwaagh wrote: post #5

I'm sure if china can shut people inside their houses to prevent spread, so can we. We just have to adopt a different attitude towards fundamental rights. Besides, medicine development seems to go rather quickly. I am sure it will be mostly dealt with in a years time.

This is impossible to know. Just because months after the outbreak China has managed to contain it, doesn't mean that there can't be a second wave of reinfection

Yes, most likely. But it can be more or less severe depending on whether we manage to contain the 'first wave'

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#139

Post by 101404 »

jyounker wrote: post #122
101404 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UBI could be possible in a closed society, but not if you are open for uncontrolled influx of people from outside your society. Because the offer "get free money" is just too good. There was the choice what to focus on, and we decided we wanted uncontrolled immigration. Fair choice, but the consequence is that UBI won't work anymore.

> we decided we wanted uncontrolled immigration The US is notoriously complicated to gain entry to by legal means.

Yes, and I don't really want to discuss the pros or cons of open borders. But it is also notoriously complicated to get a million dollars.

Re: “I'm not sure there is an acceptable solution to the problem we are facing”

#140

Post by TeMPOraL »

tsimionescu wrote: post #68
wwweston wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> scaling back shit that nobody needs. Do we know what nobody needs, for real? Sure, there might be some low-hanging fruit, but this seems like an area where Chesterton's fence would apply in spades, lest our judgments age as well as Rick Perry talking about the Department of Energy. And there's also the fact that it's demand for non-essential things that employs the large portion of people who moved out of farming a…

Given the lack of any incentives to prioritize productive work and useful products over feel-good products, it would actually be strange to discover that the economy is actually only producing useful items.

Indeed. In particular, one of the biggest and richest industries exists primarily to artificially induce demand for things that aren't needed.
Post reply on HN