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

New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 393 posts

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#271

Post by iron0013 »

munificent wrote: post #23
ilamont wrote: post #6

There is currently no plan in place to penalize individuals for gathering socially Then people won't take the rules seriously. Lots of people in this country still don't believe or understand how much damage this virus can inflict.

Man, I hate this take. I get where it's coming from. In times of significant stress, it's important that we all pull together and do work to benefit society as a whole. And part of the way we incentivize that is by calling out people who don't do their part. I get it. But we are already inundated by outrage journalism, cancel culture, and public shaming. The last thing we need is more of that. We've already got enoug…

Nobody's inundated by cancel culture except the reactionaries that obsessively make it their straw man.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#272

Post by lutorm »

marknutter wrote: post #247
cameldrv wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The progression to death is something like: (very rough, from memory) Day 0: Infection Day 5: First Symptoms Day 11: Hospital admission/shortness of breath/oxygen Day 14: Ventilator Day 21: Death If there's no ventilator on day 14, the process is tragically accelerated.

I wonder what percentage of people have been saved by ventilators vs. merely had their death delayed.

It appears 5-10% of people need ventilators, and "need a ventilator" basically means that you will die without one. So the difference between that 5-10% and the actual death rate of <1% should be your answer.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#273

Post by Kiro »

dboreham wrote: post #268
oat_bravo_nap wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

South Korea stopped the infection without "full measures."

They acted earlier.

They also use tools that Americans will never accept (especially not the HN crowd) since it violates privacy.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#274

Post by dboreham »

quartzite wrote: post #84

It will be impossible for us to permanently stop the spread with half measures. As viral spread continues due to half hearted social distancing, when will we be able to return to normalcy? Given the characteristics of this virus even a few cases floating around seem to be enough to reignite contagion. So we persist in stasis for a month or a year with no end in sight while the economy begins to collapse, which will a…

Problem with this line of thinking is it doesn't match up with the body count in the small areas in Italy that have had high infection rates. It probably turns out to be the only choice: there is no plan B where we just let bodies pile up.

Hopefully once antibody testing is rolled out (two weeks?) your theory about high undetected infection rate will be proven true.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#275

Post by henryfjordan »

fennecfoxen wrote: post #256
quartzite wrote: post #84

It will be impossible for us to permanently stop the spread with half measures. As viral spread continues due to half hearted social distancing, when will we be able to return to normalcy? Given the characteristics of this virus even a few cases floating around seem to be enough to reignite contagion. So we persist in stasis for a month or a year with no end in sight while the economy begins to collapse, which will a…

> It will be impossible for us to permanently stop the spread with half measures. You're not going to like this, but at this point, no one expects anyone to permanently stop the spread of the virus. It is very contagious, it has a very effective stealth mode, and it is widespread. You should probably expect that over half of the world population will contract this virus. New York's restrictions are primarily to make…

Why would we only expect half the world to get it? My understanding is that everyone needs to be eventually exposed in one way or another, either contracting the virus or getting a vaccine (when they are ready).

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#276

Post by Thriptic »

psychlops wrote: post #103
docbrown wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no law enforcement action being taken for the NY or CA order. They’re relying on “social-pressure” to keep people inside.

It takes time to criminalize freedom. For some, it can't happen fast enough.

If someone wants to exercise their freedoms and accept responsibility for harm they cause to themselves, I don't have a problem with that. I do however have a problem with someone's exercise of their freedoms causing physical harm to me without my consent. In the same way that it's not acceptable to get lit and then drive a car because it creates a risk to other people, people should shut up and stay inside when told to do so in this context as they risk getting sick or being sick and spreading the disease to others, potentially killing them.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#277

Post by pjc50 »

fiftyfifty wrote: post #56

It seems highly likely that the US is headed where the whole of Europe is now: over 100,000 positives, over 5,000 deaths. We waited too long for actions like this. It will take a month before we see a drop in cases and deaths

If the US gets away with as few as 5,000 deaths that would be remarkably good, fewer than the opiate crisis (is that still going on?) or the particular long-standing cause of about 10k deaths annually that the CDC is banned from making suggestions about.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#278

Post by henryfjordan »

quartzite wrote: post #84

It will be impossible for us to permanently stop the spread with half measures. As viral spread continues due to half hearted social distancing, when will we be able to return to normalcy? Given the characteristics of this virus even a few cases floating around seem to be enough to reignite contagion. So we persist in stasis for a month or a year with no end in sight while the economy begins to collapse, which will a…

> Massive and systematic society wide testing is the first step, the second step is the bulk manufacture of demonstrated COVID-19 treatments. The third is ramping up hospital capacity.

By the time we would get tests and hospital beds, we'd already be too deep into the crisis for them to matter much. Millions will be dead.

Garcetti, the mayor of Los Angeles, said last night that we are shutting down the city to buy time to get more beds, tests, and treatments. Our leaders have a good idea of what's necessary.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#279

Post by redisman »

senordevnyc wrote: post #98
jniedrauer wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps Washingtonians are taking the recommendations more seriously I doubt that. I'm in a mid sized city in WA and I've seen a notable increase in traffic in the last week. People are leaving their homes more now. Most of the offices are empty so I'm not entirely sure where they're going, but they're going somewhere.

Maybe outdoors? Maybe fleeing cities, or going to be with family in other parts of the country since it's clear this is going to last for months?

There's nowhere to go, unless you got to a cabin for a year. Every state has double digits which is where WA was just a few weeks ago. I guess being with family might be nicer but also a larger cluster of people to infect in your household.

Re: New York Governor announces 100% workforce reduction for non-essential services

#280

Post by flyingfences »

henryfjordan wrote: post #270
fennecfoxen wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For good and for ill, it is Constitutionally problematic to "lock down" an entire state, as it is essentially placing millions of people under arrest, which in the general case is a stupefyingly terrible power for any government to wield. On the other hand, the state can totally shut down businesses. In circumstances like this, it is not suspect in the least. I will further note that for Cuomo to be criminally prosec…

Under a declared emergency, the constitution turns more into "guidelines". Almost no right in the constitution is unlimited. Speech and movement can be restricted with good cause, and this virus certainly counts. States right now very much have the legal power to say "no gatherings of any sort, no leaving your house without good cause, etc".

> Under a declared emergency, the constitution turns more into "guidelines".

That's certainly the way it's treated nowadays. That doesn't make such treatment right.

Post reply on HN