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

181–190 of 373 posts

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

#181

Post by neuronic »

saneshark wrote: post #62

It's a beautiful thing if it can bring humanity together towards a common aim. But if it leads to the collapse of monetary systems, the collapse of civil society, looting, rioting, the rise of nationalism, and WWIII that's most certainly going to lead more death and destruction than the virus itself.

Way to escalate the situation. Let's see how well quarantine measures work and how the next 4 weeks pan out with the economy in hibernation.

It will cost us dearly but I wouldn't say it's going to lead to rioting and WW3. If anything, this is a global problem for which we need global solutions and not fucking nationalism merely 100 years after it already screwed our societies.

Let's hope that China will enforce prohibition of wild animal trade/use as much as possible. It's not in the CCPs interest to let that kind of instability rain down on it.

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

#182

Post by scotty79 »

keiferski wrote: post #127
lifeisstillgood wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it needs to be based on good science. As someone in thread said, the false positive rate needs to be staggeringly low. And the false positive for Testosterone -> AntiSocial behaviour is huge - marathon runners to entrepreneurs and weight lifters. So the idea is good - test people for something bad they will do - but the ability to test reliably for all the bad things is real low. I think we shall just stick to pa…

I don't think it is a good idea or good tool at all. I don't need or want some external authority to tell me if I'm allowed to leave my house. I used the example of "Anti Social" behavior as a joke and I thought that was obvious...but apparently not. The idea is entirely antithetical to a free society. As someone indicated in another comment, the proper way to do this is through personalized incentives and social enc…

> I don't need or want some external authority to tell me if I'm allowed to leave my house.

In a world full of Covid19 mutations, some even more lethal than the current one you actually might need external authority to tell you if you can leave the house because you yourself will lack technology to asses the risks involved and your decision making even if you have the information might be very dangerous to other peoples freedoms.

You still might not want that because people's wants are not necessarily reasonable.

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

#183

Post by scotty79 »

kijin wrote: post #87
londons_explore wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Imagine a future where you do a swab test every morning while brushing your teeth. If you had any of thousands of infectious diseases, you're required to stay home. The test would take only 5 minutes, and you get fined if you don't do it, and receive sick pay if you test positive. I imagine that within a few years of rolling this out, common colds might be a thing of the past, and overall worker productivity higher r…

Here's a less dystopian variation of your idea. Everyone has access to those swabs, either for free, included with their health insurance plan, or at a marginal cost. It's not mandatory to use it every day, but there are incentives such as automatic sick pay and discounts on health insurance. On the other hand, there will be serious legal consequences if you test positive, decide to go to work anyway, and end up infe…

I think a lot of people would opt in to this testing just to get a chance of paid free day.

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

#184

Post by blueblimp »

There absolutely is an acceptable way out of this. China, South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore, at least, are going to be just fine. They are focused on suppressing and controlling the virus. Once they get few enough imports from travel (presumably by restricting travel from countries where the virus is uncontrolled) and eliminate local transmission, they can resume life-as-usual, apart from being on high alert for imported cases.

There is no other acceptable solution. Countries hoping to avoid the short-term economic cost of suppressing the virus will find themselves paying a greater economic cost over the long-term along with a massive cost in lives.

The question is now: which countries will adopt the correct approach before it's too late?

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

#185

Post by neuronic »

wiz21c wrote: post #98

Interestingly, when we face a problem where deaths can be attributed to a very specific, identifiable killer, politicians don't fail to act in strong ways... Let's talk about action against climate change now...

Climate change is not the immediate threat to old men that it needs to be in order to get things moving.

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

#186

Post by growlist »

majewsky wrote: post #144
growlist wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

How exactly does cutting down the number of shampoo brands help fix the Coronavirus crisis? Even if you go from 1000 shampoo variants to maybe a dozen, the amount of shampoo that's produced does not change significantly. The only effect this is going to have is discrimination against minorities with special needs. I have atopic dermatitis and need to buy shampoo at the pharmacy for absurd prices because the regular s…

I don't think the 'I must have argan oil and lime caviar in my next shampoo because the advert says so' need is qualitatively the same as your clinical need though is it? If anything I'd say that indicates the failure of unrestricted markets.

This all started with black_puppydog's comment: > 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.

Anybody whose life would be drastically worsened by having 10 different types of shampoo rather than x hundred needs help.

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

#187

Post by himinlomax »

neuronic wrote: post #154
swagasaurus-rex wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do masks even work on things as small as viruses?

Masks contain spread. They do not protect from it. So if you are sick, wear a mask. Here in Germany you still get publicly ridiculed for it.

That's not even true, I saw a study that showed that even makeshift masks reduced the risk of infection, though obviously not as much as a N95 mask.

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

#188

Post by QuesnayJr »

dang wrote: post #112
QuesnayJr wrote: post #58

David Graeber is a stupid person, and the thesis of that book is stupid. There are boring jobs, and there are jobs that wouldn't exist in utopia, but he has no idea why jobs exist or what function they serve. His book is paradoxically feel-good, in that just because we can imagine a world in which nobody has to shovel shit that we can eliminate all shit-shoveling jobs today. Shit, I actually worked at the kinds of jo…

Personal attacks aren't allowed on HN regardless of how stupid someone is or you feel they are. Even if you don't owe David Graeber better (though you do), you definitely owe this community better if you're posting to it. Comments like this add rotational momentum to the downward spiral. It's a pity, because your comment also makes some good points. But adding poison to the commons is more significant. If you'd pleas…

So calling jobs of many people here "bullshit", like the original comment did, is okay? Apparently so.

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

#189

Post by neuronic »

pavelrub wrote: post #180
neuronic wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Masks contain spread. They do not protect from it. So if you are sick, wear a mask. Here in Germany you still get publicly ridiculed for it.

I'd like to see a source that they do not protect from incoming droplets. This seems to be completely false.

Surgeon General sufficient for you? Masks still contain droplet, at least reduce them so even DIY paper towel masks help.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/29/health/coronavirus-n95-fa...

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

#190

Post by sokoloff »

londons_explore wrote: post #100
mxcrossb wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’d have to have a staggeringly low false positive rate to be able to do this, because you’d basically have no prior, and you’re testing for multiple things.

If a false positive results in someone staying home and getting paid, one can easily work out the economic cost of that. Then it becomes a simple economics problem - how much should the government spend on improving the test to regain a bit of productivity. A false negative (someone going about their day despite being infectious) is just the status quo, and has served us well for centuries.

I would expect a gaming system to emerge (to force positive test results when people wanted time off without suffering any consequences). Done well, that might be the most valuable purely wasteful invention ever created.
Post reply on HN