31–40 of 102 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you think that would be different if you lived in a place big enough for a dedicated office?
I have a dedicated office with a door that closes, fiber internet, giant monitor, etc. I can’t wait for all of this Zoom stuff to be over and go back to being in the office.
I'm not saying there won't be permanent changes - I believe this is a catalyst that will make remote working the norm for many industries, including my own. But I have been hearing, for example, American podcast hosts saying they may never step inside a restaurant again (this was on The Argument, and all three hosts agreed) or people claiming that the tourism industry is permanently neutered. I just don't see human behaviours changing so dramatically, and I don't see any reason why we should be more afraid of Coronavirus in 10 years than we are of Polio today.
In Poland tele consultation in healthcare were rare. Now it is the norm including drug prescribtion and paid sick leave. Some consultations will go back, but a lot of changes will become the new norm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand why people are assuming this instead of the easier explanation of that (1) things will eventually bounce back and (2) somebody born in 1-2 generations will have no idea what the pandemic was like. As precedent, I cite the 1918 flu. In 1918 people were getting arrested for not wearing masks. The following decade was called "The Roaring '20s," and I don't presume it roared because of all the social d…
On the other hand, the era after WWI saw the birth of the modern welfare state in Europe (first in the U.K., and then gradually across the rest of Europe), and WWII saw the United States establish itself as the pre-eminent global power, a position it hasn’t relinquished since. When it comes to global scale events, we have a tendency to overestimate the short term consequences and overestimate the long term.
Well to be fair, it is working as hard as possible at throwing away that position right now...
I know this isn't the popular opinion, but aren't we blowing the virus out of proportion a bit? Don't something like 20-25% of all New Yorkers already have antibodies? Doesn't that show the virus isn't that dangerous? The body count would be in the millions by now.
For many viral diseases the severity in a particular individual depends on how much of the virus they were exposed do. I don't believe that know yet if COVID-19 is such a disease.
For such diseases, you could have a case where a large fraction of the population is going to get it regardless of whether you continue as normal or you social distance and stay at home as much as feasible, but in the former case most get a large enough dose to get very sick or die and the the latter case most get a small enough dose to not get sick or just get mildly sick. In both cases you would have a large fraction with antibodies.
My kids have been having their music lessons (cello & viola) remotely since the quarantine. For the advanced student, I can see 50% of lessons workable as remote, but not more than that. My kid may switch to every other lesson remote (two lessons per week at 45 minutes each). For the beginner, it doesn’t work that well, but I suppose it’s better than nothing.
But we need to figure out why the initial lessons are better in person than remote. It could be that small changes are needed in camera placement, or screens or something we haven't thought of. For many instruments you outline, it is how the bow or the instrument is held, this might be better online with the right tools, esp if you had multicamera pose estimation, it might not even need a teacher the majority of the…
For some people, having a literal physical "safe space" and an understanding human does wonders, and there's connection and understanding that seems like it might be hard to replicate virtually.
But for other people, the distance that video or phone provides actually gives them the ability to open up more than in person -- precisely because it seems less personal and therefore less threatening or potentially judging. After all, it's just a disembodied voice or a floating head on a screen.
So it's pretty good to have a mix of options.
This is very strange to read from here in New Zealand, where life is fairly close to getting back to normal. I don't see any reason why our basic lifestyles should be permanently changed by this virus. As bad as things feel now, we will eventually get on top of the epidemic and in a few short years this period will be a distant memory. I'm not saying there won't be permanent changes - I believe this is a catalyst tha…
We're social animals and we're not going to ditch physical interaction. (not to mention that research by people like Alex Pentland suggests that physical contact in a common workplace has benefits that can't be replicated remotely).
Companies like Yahoo and IBM already tried out remote working and rolled their efforts back, this is simply an overraction. With the exception of telemedicine for underserved regions maybe, where it fills a genuine gap and suffered from regulation up until now.
This is very strange to read from here in New Zealand, where life is fairly close to getting back to normal. I don't see any reason why our basic lifestyles should be permanently changed by this virus. As bad as things feel now, we will eventually get on top of the epidemic and in a few short years this period will be a distant memory. I'm not saying there won't be permanent changes - I believe this is a catalyst tha…