Live data from Hacker News

A case for ending lockdown

ryankemper.io

191–200 of 381 posts

Re: A case for ending lockdown

#191

> Encourage at-risk groups to self quarantine, and utilize testing to protect them...Those with obesity and COPD Author suggests self-quarantine for the obese instead of quarantine/lockdown for everyone. The CDC suggests that +42% of the US adult population is obese [0]. Are we really going to isolate or quarantine 4 out of 10 US adults and imagine the economy can get back on track? [0]: https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/d…

Also, advocates of re-opening vastly overestimate their ability to make that happen. I don’t feel safe going outside, so any suggestion that for the good of the economy I should do so will be met with a string of naughty words and continued quarantine on my part. If they want me to go back out and resume regular economic activity, they need to focus on what’ll make that feel safe again.

Re: A case for ending lockdown

#192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This should be flagged. >Why is a software engineer qualified to present this? The opinions of software engineers about subject outside their area of expertise is the bulk of the commentary on this site. I don't think it's realistic to expect a community to enforce a restriction on submissions when such a restriction would hit so close to home. That would require a level of cognitive dissonance that even HN is proba…

One of the big issues in the pandemic is the spread of misinformation. I don’t think media channels ... and I’m including HN here ... should be giving a megaphone to random opinions. Now it the time for experts voices to be amplified, not random people with an opinion. I notice in the comments dang supports this post which is a surprise.

> One of the big issues in the pandemic is the spread of misinformation.

Along with censorship and blind worship of authority.

> Now it the time for experts voices to be amplified, not random people with an opinion.

Which experts? The experts you agree with or are politically aligned with? Or all experts?

> I notice in the comments dang supports this post which is a surprise.

An even greater surprise is the attempt to censor people who are giving their honest and fair opinion and assessment - which is not misinformation.

The experts have spoken and people have the right to discuss and offer their opinions. Using your logic, hacker news shouldn't exist because only the "experts" should be allowed a voice.

Re: A case for ending lockdown

#193

> I’m a software / site reliability engineer okay, thanks. Seriously, the list of scientist and medical organizations advising through this period is so long, I don't know why anyone who isn't at equally experienced tries to counter-claim their insights. I'm not saying we shouldn't do our own research and arrive at our own conclusion, but if you arrive at a different conclusion, you're almost certainly the one whose…

I’ve started explicitly telling people in my life that I’m not interested in their non-expert opinions when they weigh in on when we should open up.

Would you also agree with WHO's expert advice against wearing masks and against restricting travel?

These are literally the world's top experts, so you should just accept what they say and do not challenge that.

Is this correct?

Re: A case for ending lockdown

#194
post #190

> I’m a software / site reliability engineer okay, thanks. Seriously, the list of scientist and medical organizations advising through this period is so long, I don't know why anyone who isn't at equally experienced tries to counter-claim their insights. I'm not saying we shouldn't do our own research and arrive at our own conclusion, but if you arrive at a different conclusion, you're almost certainly the one whose…

That seems to be classical ad hominem. For example, I also don't have medical education, yet I am entitled to analyze information and insist that homeopathy, Chinese medicine and chlorine necklaces absolutely do not help against the virus, unlike the educated medical professionals who disagree with me.

“You have no credentials or expertise to make public health recommendations” is not an ad hominem.

Re: A case for ending lockdown

#195
post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sweden has much larger nursing homes than, for example, Norway, and most deaths in Sweden are from nursing homes. The time integral of the curve over 1 year will tell the real story.

Most deaths in most countries are in nursing homes. Do we not care if older people die?

Given that basically nobody wants to end up in a nursing home, but do, often to face neglect and abuse, I'd say that no, we don't really care what happens to old people in nursing homes. Out of sight, out of mind. Yeah, sure, people with a lot of moral indignation will gnash their teeth at such a claim, but I just can't see how they're actually good places to be, and how if we really cared we'd structure our society in a way that makes them necessary.

Re: A case for ending lockdown

#196

> Encourage at-risk groups to self quarantine, and utilize testing to protect them...Those with obesity and COPD Author suggests self-quarantine for the obese instead of quarantine/lockdown for everyone. The CDC suggests that +42% of the US adult population is obese [0]. Are we really going to isolate or quarantine 4 out of 10 US adults and imagine the economy can get back on track? [0]: https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/d…

Also, advocates of re-opening vastly overestimate their ability to make that happen. I don’t feel safe going outside, so any suggestion that for the good of the economy I should do so will be met with a string of naughty words and continued quarantine on my part. If they want me to go back out and resume regular economic activity, they need to focus on what’ll make that feel safe again.

That can change very quickly once the fearmongering on the news stops reaching you.

Here in Hong Kong, people who were obsessively sterilizing everything and were scared to go outside 2 weeks ago are now taking off their masks and going to the beach.

Re: A case for ending lockdown

#197
post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, advocates of re-opening vastly overestimate their ability to make that happen. I don’t feel safe going outside, so any suggestion that for the good of the economy I should do so will be met with a string of naughty words and continued quarantine on my part. If they want me to go back out and resume regular economic activity, they need to focus on what’ll make that feel safe again.

That can change very quickly once the fearmongering on the news stops reaching you. Here in Hong Kong, people who were obsessively sterilizing everything and were scared to go outside 2 weeks ago are now taking off their masks and going to the beach.

I think the differences between HK and America are quite a bit more than “fearmongering”.

Re: A case for ending lockdown

#198
I think this is summarizing what a lot of people with a working brain probably already are thinking privately.

In general, I think there are too many arm chair scientists with opinions right now and this is not helping. Part of the reason is that we're all sitting at home mildly bored and frustrated with the sudden restrictions on our life.

My general attitude is that I understand people are afraid and considering I don't like scaring people, I'm open to adapting to their needs right now and am trying to be mindful. So, doing the right thing for me is not blaming people for being irrational and trying to adapt to their emotional needs.

However, I am very worried about the self inflicted economic pain and misery and how that is going to affect me personally as well as people I care about. E.g. my parents are retired and already had their pension devalued a few times in the last decade. Stuff like this is likely to cause more cuts. They are well off regardless but there are many pensioners who get to ride out their remaining years/decades with a significant cut in income and no chance to fix that. Stuff like this happens when we trigger a global recession/depression out of fear.

Another thing that I observe happening is that lockdown policies and the resulting bureaucracy, constantly changing rules, etc. are by and large coming from people who are interpreting what they are hearing from others. A few weeks ago when everything was extremely scary this was understandable. But we're past that now.

Most of what they hear is either without much scientific basis/merit, severely watered down/dumbed down pseudo scientific babble, or worse flat out wrong information.

Also these decision makers have agendas that go beyond trying to do the right thing. E.g. a lot of politicians have enormous egos and are under a lot of pressure to be seen doing something. Add populism to the mix or overzealous anti vaxers, and you have a perfect storm of mass hysteria and a lot of completely pointless policy. Add lawyers to the mix, and you get a lot of ass coverage on top. Bureaucrats when faced with demands raining down from the top, oblige by coming up with lots of rules and demands for more budget. Politicians oblige, and you get more of the same.

So, a scientist might say something like "Sure, whatever, go wear a non medical mask if it makes you feel good. It might even help though I'm not aware of any studies to that effect. But go knock yourself out. "

In the hands of bureaucrats that turns into the police issueing crippling fines for small businesses tolerating customers without masks in their shops. This is actually happening in Germany. In France people have to print a form stating their intentions when leaving their house and the police is very busy enforcing that. In Sweden, restaurants are open as normal and the government seems to have shown some restraint with imposing measures. France got hit really hard early on but is now improving. Germany and Sweden are largely fine already. Germany has enjoyed a widely published low death rate despite being quite late with locking down. The point is, they are doing widely different things (including doing nothing) with more or less similar outcomes. It's fine. The world is not ending.

IMHO we are well prepared in case this virus comes back. We'll detect it earlier, act more decisively and hopelessly less stupidly. So, lift the restrictions and allow people to self restrain and decisively act locally based on testing/incidents/common sense.

Re: A case for ending lockdown

#199
post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve started explicitly telling people in my life that I’m not interested in their non-expert opinions when they weigh in on when we should open up.

Would you also agree with WHO's expert advice against wearing masks and against restricting travel? These are literally the world's top experts, so you should just accept what they say and do not challenge that. Is this correct?

This is an extremely bad faith response.

Nobody suggested that experts are infallible or should be followed blindly, that’s just an obvious straw man. Experts disagree and make mistakes, and other experts regularly help point that out and make corrections.

What does not follow is the idea that expertise doesn’t matter, and that I have to listen to everyone single person’s hot take on a subject that they just started studying last month.

Re: A case for ending lockdown

#200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks, will definitely read it, but on a first glance I couldn't see any information on your background or experience in the field of epidemiology or a related science. It would definitely help to put your thoughts into context and if you have a background in this field it would give your collection of thoughts more weight. With all the misinformation going around I resorted to mainly listen to scientists in the rel…

I have no directly relevant credentials whatsoever and don't claim to. (I actually considered saying as such in the writeup but it's already so verbose that I felt it wasn't worth it). I'm just a dude that likes to read research papers. As an aside, there is totally an archetype of the software engineer that thinks they're equipped to dive into unrelated fields, and I definitely match that trope. I will say in my def…

I have no directly relevant credentials whatsoever and don't claim to. (I actually considered saying as such in the writeup but it's already so verbose that I felt it wasn't worth it).

This doesn't really pass the sniff test. You wrote 7500 words on this topic, but felt that including "I have zero experience in any relevant fields" would be overly verbose? Are you sure there wasn't another reason?

arguments should be evaluated on their merits, rather than credentials

It's not about credentials, it's about relevant knowledge and experience, without which it can be very difficult to actually properly evaluate the merits.

Post reply on HN