I've noticed the decline in advertising in my (physical) mailbox - it's bereft of junk mail for the last month.
USPS are also being hammered:
https://www.npr.org/2020/04/08/828949609/youve-got-less-mail...
L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Eliminated’
321–330 of 568 posts
Re: L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Eliminated’
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the end no one will know if it was worth it since no country went in the other direction and just lived with it. The UK tried for a bit but then reacted harshly as the situation worsened. Maybe not doing anything would've resulted in a few months of medical chaos and not much more, maybe it would've destroyed whole societies. But the polls I'm aware of show that the majority of people is supportive of measures nea…
Sorry, I don't recall being democratically asked whether shutting down everything indefinitely was something I agreed with before it happened. Of course people will agree that it's a good idea when the media is blaring "PANDEMIC" at them 24/7.
"Of course" what? You're aware that different parts of the US have reacted very differently despite having similar national media blaring at them, right?
Re: L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Eliminated’
#323Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry, I don't recall being democratically asked whether shutting down everything indefinitely was something I agreed with before it happened. Of course people will agree that it's a good idea when the media is blaring "PANDEMIC" at them 24/7.
"Of course" what? You're aware that different parts of the US have reacted very differently despite having similar national media blaring at them, right?
I was replying to this:
> But the polls I'm aware of show that the majority of people is supportive of measures nearly everywhere (I'm not aware of a poll that shows the opposite).
Re: L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Eliminated’
#324Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep. Maybe we move to a model where low quality/#FakeNews is free but quality costs and, presumably, you then move to a point where pooled subscriptions are a thing under that model. And it costs a substantial amount of money or you get it through a library. There's a lot less accessibility under that model, especially for those that don't really have disposable income. There's also the question of whether enough wil…
In France, where I live, there have been calls to institute a "content tax" that would be redistributed to companies that produce content. In exchange, there would be no more laws to prevent piracy. That means that torenting/reading/listening to everything would be legal whatever the means but you'd have to give the state X$/month that are then redistributed to companies based on some factors. That could also apply t…
This reminded me of the ROMS and the allOfmp3 saga of years ago. That site was a decade head of it's time an "explouting" a Russian law, but it showed exactly this. When contend per se has no differentiation value, companies have to compete on the delivery method, and we get amazing experiences as Netflix or Steam or Tidal (or allofmp3 arguably).
Re: L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Eliminated’
#325Earlier quoted context omitted.
The comment was not hyperbolic. Since you believe that, that means you don't believe the projections (or maybe the current statistics). That's fine, but don't respond by denigrating on the wrong basis. Instead of accusing people of exaggerating things as if they have some kind of agenda, just be straightforward and say I don't believe those numbers.
You've made a ton of huge leaps here. The comment is hyperbolic because it's using the tried-and-true tactic of "People are dying!!" to push their view and denigrate others'. As I said above: it's a complex issue. The consequences of shutting the world down just might be worse than the death toll of COVID. At the very least, it's a discussion worth having.
People literally are dying. That's not the parent's hyperbole, it's a fact. Official projections from health organizations indicate trends will continue. Again, not the parent's hyperbole. If you think it's hyperbole then that means you don't believe the official death numbers.
And "it's not a hyperbole" does not mean "it's not a complex issue" or "the alternative is better" or "it's not a discussion worth having". By all means, have your discussion. Point out that it's a complex issue like you already did. And if you dispute the claimed facts, dispute them and bring your own facts. If you don't, then just don't falsely accuse people of exaggerating them. Don't sling mud at factual arguments made in good faith; it's not difficult for others to reciprocate.
Re: L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Eliminated’
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the end no one will know if it was worth it since no country went in the other direction and just lived with it. The UK tried for a bit but then reacted harshly as the situation worsened. Maybe not doing anything would've resulted in a few months of medical chaos and not much more, maybe it would've destroyed whole societies. But the polls I'm aware of show that the majority of people is supportive of measures nea…
Isn’t that exactly what Sweden is currently doing?
And currently backtracking on.
Re: L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Eliminated’
#327Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sweden also has a fairly low population density outside its larger cities, as well as a relatively small (10M) population. And its measures aren't without criticism - consider they have 100 deaths per 1M people, which places them 10th on countries with over 1K cases. There's states in the US with similar densities; I'd imagine those would be spared most of the deaths, even if stricter measures weren't implemented, bu…
Even if you look at Germany, you will see huge regional differences. If you look at the map of the positive tested, you can clearly see spikes in the huge cities (Berlin, Hamburg, München) and in densely populated regions. You can also still see that the infection density is higher around the places of initial infections (Bavaria for example, many skiing tourists who got infected in Austria/Italy). On the other side,…
And interestingly, those on holiday seem to have brought it back at a much greater rate than business travelers. E.g. Frankfurt isn't an epicenter despite having the largest airport and a lot of business travel, esp. to China. Many of the early outbreaks can be traced back to either Italy or Austria during Easter holidays. And that's where centers of infection remain.
Re: L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Eliminated’
#328Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sweden has far fewer cases and death rate without a massive lockdown. If this disease is really so deadly, why isn’t their country being massively depopulated? Same for states in the US that haven’t implemented any lockdown measures.
Sweden has the highest death rate per capita of all developed nations.
I'd like to believe that Belgium, Italy, France and others in Europe are also developed.
Re: L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Eliminated’
#329The LA Times's investigation into Purdue Pharma in 2016 revealed internal Purdue documents demonstrating the company's culpability in fueling the opioid crisis. > The documents provide a detailed picture of the development and marketing of OxyContin, how Purdue executives responded to complaints that its effects wear off early, and their fears about the financial impact of any departure from 12-hour dosing. I don't h…
At the end of the day, if a doctor is prescribing medication against clinical guidelines, surely the doctor is at fault? If a pharma warehouse is burgled then it's on the burglars. Am I missing something regarding this case? Did they mislead doctors? Edit: Downvotes to -4 with no engagement for asking a question. This place has gone downhill rapidly
First, they I mislead doctors. They insisted very enthusiastically that’d OxyContin relieved pain for 8 hours, when 4-6 was much more common for most patients. Secondly, I don’t remember the laws and requirements exactly, but there are reporting requirements for abnormal behaviors that indicate drug abuse. One of the long form articles over the past few years saw a memo where Perdue deliberately decided not to report large orders in certain areas. Of course, I haven’t had coffee yet, so caveat lector.
Re: L.A. Times to Furlough Workers as Ad Revenue ‘Nearly Eliminated’
#330Earlier quoted context omitted.
The logic still applies. Obviously, I hope for zero deaths. But I also don’t forbid them from driving, despite the high number of deaths for that mode of travel. I don’t tell them to quarantine themselves every flu season. Anyway, I’m not sure we’ve overreacted. I’m just saying it’s possible and it’s pretty amazing how it’s hard to have a conversation about it. People treat the topic like there’s only one answer and…
The risks of driving and seasonal flu are fairly well understood. And there are mitigation’s in place: seatbelts, traffic laws, theraflu, flu shots, etc. I’m not calling you a murderer. I’m asking you to put a hard number in the risk you are willing to absorb. Mine is 0.
> Mine is 0.
To be perfectly fair, the current lockdown _IS_ going to kill people that would've survived otherwise. People that now won't go into emergency rooms out of fear of contracting Covid19, poor people whose source of income is completely dried out. And longer term, this is going to cost massive amounts of money, a fraction of which would of course be used to prolong someone's life in some way, eventually. I think the question raised in this thread is simply one of "what's the trade-off". It's very clear that there are costs to this lockdown, and at least to me it's also very clear that that some of those costs are human lives. However, we can't estimate those costs. We do have a guess of the rough fatality rate of covid19, and we do have models that will tell us how many people will die if we don't go into lockdown. But we don't have the same luxury for estimating the amount of people hurt and dead because of it that could otherwise be saved. We can quantify the monetary loss, but not how much of that loss would've otherwise gone towards saving lives. I think the question of "what are the human costs of this lockdown" is a fair one to ask. Don't get me wrong, I too think the lockdown makes sense and overall does save lifes. But the lockdown is not without risk, and even more importantly: I have not seen any estimate of the risk. Is it lower than 0.5-5% of the population? I think so, but both of us haven't done the math, so you talking down to people who ask about it is wrong.