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

Getting Back to Work

tesla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 332 posts

Re: Getting Back to Work

#281

Post by tsimionescu »

BobbyJo wrote: post #254
tsimionescu wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing is, people everywhere want to work, with extraordinarily few exceptions. A government doesn't really need to incentivize work in general, only some specific kinds of work which are underperformed.

Citation? I find it funny that no matter how many times history, and even contemporary events, have taught us otherwise, people still believe "People don't need strong incentives to work!"

You can look at employment rates in countries with generous social welfare and unemployment benefits, and notice that the percentage of the population sitting idle who are not sick is minuscule, and not significantly different format the idle population in countries with weak unemployment benefits.

It is true that there are systematic exceptions - especially people born rich.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#282

Post by throwaway4220 »

ydb wrote: post #156
eplanit wrote: post #152

Elon Musk is my new hero.

Pfft. Elon has always been my hero. :) But on a more serious note, it is great that we are seeing thought leaders counter-act the media propaganda frenzy regarding this situation. The "big evil businessman" know best that our economy is on shaky ground, and that continuing social distancing measures will immeasurably damage America's position as a global power (and thus its citizens security and freedom) more than a…

I am fortunate to be employed too, but I work in a closed space with little contact with others. Unless you work in a meatpacking plant, hospital, factory, or front-facing office, you may be taking on less risk than Tesla workers.

In defense, Tesla did send an e-mail to the workers saying they could stay home if they are at risk, which is hats off to them. Is it legally defensible to use this if they get fired? I hope so.

Man, I really liked Elon, until he started downplaying and dismissing the risk of COVID. It just didn't come from solid scientific reasoning in my view. Taken out of context, this lawsuit would have had me in full support of Tesla. But I now really have to question his motives behind employing people at Tesla.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#283

Post by BobbyJo »

tsimionescu wrote: post #281
BobbyJo wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citation? I find it funny that no matter how many times history, and even contemporary events, have taught us otherwise, people still believe "People don't need strong incentives to work!"

You can look at employment rates in countries with generous social welfare and unemployment benefits, and notice that the percentage of the population sitting idle who are not sick is minuscule, and not significantly different format the idle population in countries with weak unemployment benefits. It is true that there are systematic exceptions - especially people born rich.

Productivity in the US is considerably higher than most, if not all of those countries, when you account for productivity per hour and hours worked: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/v/s/www.forbes.c...

Unemployment just tells you people have a job, and nothing about how much that job is contributing to the collective resources.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#284

Post by mbreese »

babesh wrote: post #275
IfOnlyYouKnew wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The biggest problem are the outright lies (e.g. about masks not helping). The issue of masks is/was more complicated than just an intentional lie. Medicine has a rather well-known history of really bad ideas that, at their time, were perfectly reasonable ideas within the knowledge and commonly accepted paradigms of their time. Bloodletting, arsenic, later high-dose Vitamin C (and after that, D), Resveratrol etc. It…

Nothing changed in the science between when they were saying that masks were not useful and when they said it was mandatory.

The thing that changed was the realization that there were significant numbers of asymptomatic carriers. This was not something that was fully appreciated at the initial stages of the pandemic response (in the US at least).

Masks really don't help protect you as an individual. There isn't a lot of data available, but it has been studied (Ars has a good overview here [0]). The main take home message from most of the studies was that infection rates were largely unchanged or worse when people wore masks -- one theory being that there was a false sense of security. Contaminated air will simply get past any non-medical grade N95 mask (and N95 masks that aren't properly fit won't protect from viruses). So telling people that masks didn't help was completely accurate.

But, when you have asymptomatic carriers, the masks help protect other people from you. They do this by limiting the distance contaminated air travels from your mouth/nose. So, masks are only effective when they are used by everyone -- and in the context of asymptomatic carriers. Also when people are able to be distant from each other, masks really don't help much more. It's when people can't be distant that they help -- but again, they aren't meant to protect the wearer.

The health authorities (and the media) in my Midwestern city have been very clear about the motivations for masks. Unfortunately, communicating this reasoning has not been as effective. People tend to be more concerned about protecting themselves than the others. (Which is understandable)

[0] https://arstechnica.com/science/2020/04/should-you-wear-a-fa...

Re: Getting Back to Work

#285

Post by cjhopman »

mushbino wrote: post #229
mchusma wrote: post #225

One important point in this discussion is that workers only have to return at their own discretion. Since no worker is being forced to work, the argument is best thought of as whether or not workers who chooses to work should be allowed to do so given Tesla's plan. They can also stay at home if they prefer, or seek other employment if they want to work but find Tesla's safety plan unconvincing.

Will workers still be eligible for unemployment insurance payments if they choose not to go back after Tesla opens?

They won't, and that puts the lie to all these people saying it's no big deal and they don't have to go to work if they don't want to.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#286

Post by BobbyJo »

okaram wrote: post #279
BobbyJo wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They've drastically changed the number of infected for now, during a continuing lockdown. Once planes start flying again, and people start travelling again, infections will continue. I agree we want to change outcomes, and flattening the curve is part of that. Delaying infections until better treatments is part of that. But we can't commit to waiting for a vaccine, and we can't commit to waiting for a good treatment.…

Why can’t we wait? I’m not arguing we should, but I’m not sure we can’t. What I think is that we sorta can and sorta should; we need to figure out the trade-offs, as best as we can, and decide what measures we want to keep for another year (will vary by country/state/city).

I think most people would rather take the risk than commit to 12-16 more months for a 'possible' way out, one we have no means of quantifying yet.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#287

Post by babesh »

mbreese wrote: post #284
babesh wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing changed in the science between when they were saying that masks were not useful and when they said it was mandatory.

The thing that changed was the realization that there were significant numbers of asymptomatic carriers. This was not something that was fully appreciated at the initial stages of the pandemic response (in the US at least). Masks really don't help protect you as an individual. There isn't a lot of data available, but it has been studied (Ars has a good overview here [0]). The main take home message from most of the s…

There was an immediate and massive run on n95 masks. Those do protect you much better. I think it was mostly to protect the supply for medical providers.

Also my understanding is that even cloth masks somewhat protect against droplets.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#288

Post by mbreese »

babesh wrote: post #287
mbreese wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing that changed was the realization that there were significant numbers of asymptomatic carriers. This was not something that was fully appreciated at the initial stages of the pandemic response (in the US at least). Masks really don't help protect you as an individual. There isn't a lot of data available, but it has been studied (Ars has a good overview here [0]). The main take home message from most of the s…

There was an immediate and massive run on n95 masks. Those do protect you much better. I think it was mostly to protect the supply for medical providers. Also my understanding is that even cloth masks somewhat protect against droplets.

I'm sorry, but your understanding in this regard is mistaken. Non-N95 masks are simply not designed for this purpose. They will always let in outside (contaminated) air.

From the Ars Technica article above (which I believe is citing this paper: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/bmjopen/5/4/e006577.full.pdf)

> Wearing cloth masks resulted in significantly higher rates of infection, the authors found. They also noted that in their test, the cloth masks were only 3 percent effective at blocking particles.

Ask yourself this question -- why do surgeons wear masks when operating on patients? It isn't to protect themselves from the patient... it's to protect that patient from the surgeon. If the patient is infectious, then a surgeon wears a completely different set of protective gear to protect themselves.

And N95 masks only work when properly fit. I haven't been fit for an N95 mask, so I don't know what size would be right for me. If you don't have the right size/type of mask, it can be more dangerous for you than if you didn't have a mask. Why? Because when you have a mask, people can feel completely protected and stop taking other precautions. If you are keeping isolated from others, there is no need for a mask.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#289

Post by rapind »

wwweston wrote: post #258
babesh wrote: post #218

This is the very best article I have read on the lockdown: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2020/05/04/seattles-leade... The positive is that Washington state acted early and the Bay Area followed quickly which resulted in lower hospitalization and deaths. Tech’s quick move to WFH probably helped slow the spread. This was driven by the Washington state health officials who worked with Microsoft. Bay Area tech compa…

The problem of getting a lay audience to understand policy based off of specialized knowledge is non-trivial (as any engineer knows very well). "What can we say today so that people will be ready to hear what we need to say tomorrow?" sounds less like manipulation and more like acknowledging that getting buy-in isn't merely a process of dumping factual knowledge, something that seems pretty well borne out by the publ…

An obvious problem with the general populace understanding specialized knowledge is that we need a trustworthy source to explain it.

Every major news outlet has become blatently partisan in recent years (many long before). NYT eliminated their ombudsman years ago (3 years ago I think), and television media has always been even worse. Is it really that surprising when people don't trust what they hear and gravitate towards conspiracies and bullshit?

The public has become hyper allergic to expertise. The repurcussions of this is pretty scary.

Re: Getting Back to Work

#290

Post by babesh »

mbreese wrote: post #288
babesh wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was an immediate and massive run on n95 masks. Those do protect you much better. I think it was mostly to protect the supply for medical providers. Also my understanding is that even cloth masks somewhat protect against droplets.

I'm sorry, but your understanding in this regard is mistaken. Non-N95 masks are simply not designed for this purpose. They will always let in outside (contaminated) air. From the Ars Technica article above (which I believe is citing this paper: https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/bmjopen/5/4/e006577.full.pdf ) > Wearing cloth masks resulted in significantly higher rates of infection, the authors found. They also noted th…

There were plenty of n95 masks sold for industrial use. Some of those were the plain dust mask style masks. Just search Home Depot. Are you saying that those will be more dangerous than no mask? Also it is a bad argument to argue that people will behave more foolishly with protection therefore they should not have protection. Just educate people.

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Cordova-N95-Approved-Valved-Part...

https://www.homedepot.com/p/Milwaukee-N95-Professional-Multi...

The two stories below are in opposition to the hypothesis that n95 protects others rather than the wearer. Also this: https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3074351/coro...

And

https://apple.news/AiNlYrpSfTq-cJVSXNB8vJQ

Post reply on HN