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

Fine, I'll run a regression analysis but it won't make you happy

natesilver.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 341 posts

Re: Fine, I'll run a regression analysis but it won't make you happy

#291

Post by ezekiel68 »

sangnoir wrote: post #270
Izkata wrote: post #262

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we know the size of particle they filter and we know the viruses are bigger than that. If we're talking cloth masks as most people are, the viruses are actually way smaller.

Do viruses float freely in the air, or are they mostly in aerosolized bodily fluids when from an infected persons coughs and sneezes? Cloth masks are great at trapping those and greatly reducing the "muzzle velocity" of droplets that do escape.

Yes, this is the key insight. The mere fact that the virons are smaller than holes in the mask means nothing. The virons aren't expelled from our mouths or noses on their own, but are attached to moisture droplets which _are_ effectively trapped by surgical (and better) masks.

Re: Fine, I'll run a regression analysis but it won't make you happy

#292

Post by alan-crowe »

Waterluvian wrote: post #131

It was a hard thing to broach at the time without people frothing at the mouth about how I must be anti vaccine or something: Has there been any attempt to calculate the cost-benefit of all the various measures and how extreme we should go with them? I’m guessing it’s hard to quantify and compare. A lot of things like general depression, isolation, kids missing half a year of school, etc. can’t really be evaluated ag…

People grow old and die. It takes about seventy years. Thoroughly wasting a year of everybody's lives is equivalent to 1.4% mortality.

Re: Fine, I'll run a regression analysis but it won't make you happy

#293

Post by superwalker »

ben_w wrote: post #282
candiddevmike wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

RE: masks, paper masks don't do shit, gators even worse. That's what 90% of the population wore. Had we enough N-95s for everyone, I think the mask effectiveness would've increased dramatically, but I doubt folks would put up with wearing one. For me, I still wear N-95s on planes and in crowded places, I understand their effectiveness and it fits my risk/reward profile. RE: schools, they have been and continue to be…

> For me, I still wear N-95s on planes and in crowded places, I understand their effectiveness and it fits my risk/reward profile. Likewise, however I should also add that in my case there's no risk component — not only because I get free FFP2 masks at my workplace, but also because it appears that one of the many ways that I'm unusual is that masks (and I mean this literally) cause me less issues than does my underw…

[flagged]

Re: Fine, I'll run a regression analysis but it won't make you happy

#294

Post by Anon84 »

Amorymeltzer wrote: post #43

For those curious (as I was) what he's using, it looks like Stata: https://www.reed.edu/psychology/stata/analyses/parametric/Re...

You can do the same thing (even with a similar result tui) in Python using statsmodels https://www.statsmodels.org/stable/index.html

Re: Fine, I'll run a regression analysis but it won't make you happy

#295

Post by School-Cotton »

Kelkolo wrote: post #286
listenallyall wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "everybody was wrong" and "whoopsie!" self-absolution is some of the ugliest and most hypocritical parts of the entire Covid phenomenon. No -- plenty of people were ardently against lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and school shutdowns, but all kinds of pundits and self-selected rule enforcers loudly lambasted and insulted them endlessly. Many, many lives were permanently affected in multiple, very negative ways, wi…

You do not remember the pictures from NYC? You believe they were not real? Sometimes I would love to see how corona would have ripped through your country and killed even more faster without any look down...

> You believe they were not real?

This is a non-sequitur.

It’s possible to believe Covid really did kill a lot of people and simultaneously believe that the lockdowns did not prevent enough deaths to be worth their negative effects.

Re: Fine, I'll run a regression analysis but it won't make you happy

#296

Post by School-Cotton »

slv77 wrote: post #172
Waterluvian wrote: post #131

It was a hard thing to broach at the time without people frothing at the mouth about how I must be anti vaccine or something: Has there been any attempt to calculate the cost-benefit of all the various measures and how extreme we should go with them? I’m guessing it’s hard to quantify and compare. A lot of things like general depression, isolation, kids missing half a year of school, etc. can’t really be evaluated ag…

The cost-benefit calculations in terms of excess deaths are irrelevant. It was clear even during the initial outbreak that policymakers primary constraints were the due to uncertainty about the virus and limits on availability of protective gear and ICU beds. Without protective gear there was no way to reduce transmission without isolation and once ICU beds are at capacity mortality rates double and people are dying…

> The most likely outcome of a medical system collapse would be martial law, mass graves, economic collapse and potential collapse of essential systems like food distribution.

No it’s not. You are dramatically overestimating how many people need life-saving medical services. If we had no emergency healthcare system at all and everyone who needed to go to the hospital just died instead, yes it would suck and yes we would have lower life expectancy but civilization would largely continue.

Re: Fine, I'll run a regression analysis but it won't make you happy

#297

Post by hfuyf65 »

nemo wrote: post #249
fhcuvuvuc wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter. You can't have these conversations without being censored anymore. My works HR department got sick of having people use "logic" and "evidence" to argue against their policies. After kicking a few people out the door and generally saying you can't talk about this at work anymore, nobody talks about it.

>use "logic" and "evidence" to argue against their policies. Many times when folks who tell me they're presenting "logic" and "evidence" in a debate they're personally invested in there's grave flaws in both their logic and evidence presented. The freedom to intellectually debate HR's policies in a company is rightly limited, you can call it "censorship" but endless uninvited earnest debate about policies isn't reall…

And this is where the resentment came from as well. It was always well understood that HR is not exactly there to help you, but I know I personally snapped at one drone ( and eventually quit ) over those inflexible policies dictated from clouds above.

At the end of the day, you can always choose not to play.

edit: I dont want to name the policy as it may identify the company. It was a particularly idiotic one though.

Re: Fine, I'll run a regression analysis but it won't make you happy

#298

Post by cptskippy »

loeg wrote: post #49
cptskippy wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it very much depends on where you live. Rural America returned to normal a long time ago. Many cities, like San Francisco and Atlanta, have not and are still feeling the effects to varying degrees.

Urban American returned to normal a few months later than Rural America, but we're talking like, April 2022. SF is still suffering from some dynamics that started during COVID but it's not like there are still lockdowns or compulsory masking or anything like that.

I lived in Atlanta for most of my life and commuted downtown daily for over a decade. For unrelated reasons, I moved away in July of 2020 during the lockdown.

I returned this past week for work and the city certainly did not seem back to normal. The areas around Broad Street and the intersection of Baker and Peachtree are usually bustling during lunchtime, it was a ghost town.

If your definition of normal is not lockdowns or mask requires then yes we're back to normal, but in large cities it's a new normal and certainly not a pre-pandemic normal.

Re: Fine, I'll run a regression analysis but it won't make you happy

#299

Post by nradov »

nextaccountic wrote: post #253
listenallyall wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "everybody was wrong" and "whoopsie!" self-absolution is some of the ugliest and most hypocritical parts of the entire Covid phenomenon. No -- plenty of people were ardently against lockdowns, vaccine mandates, and school shutdowns, but all kinds of pundits and self-selected rule enforcers loudly lambasted and insulted them endlessly. Many, many lives were permanently affected in multiple, very negative ways, wi…

In which way vaccine mandates were the wrong tool to fight Covid? We should have higher rates of vaccination worldwide, not lower.

I support vaccination and recommend that people follow medical guidelines. But imposing medical procedures on anyone without their informed consent is absolutely immoral. Especially since the COVID-19 vaccines do little or nothing to prevent transmission.
Post reply on HN