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

The U.S. tried to build a new fleet of ventilators

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 355 posts

Re: The U.S. tried to build a new fleet of ventilators

#341

Post by roenxi »

DonHopkins wrote: post #333
mistermann wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps I missed it, could you quote the text of that claim, please?

Don't anyone bother replying to this obvious sealioning troll technique. He has no intention of carrying out any kind of sincere argument, and his politeness is totally fake: he has no respect for anyone he's arguing with, he's just trying to waste everyone's time. Of course he saw it, but he didn't like what he saw, so now he's pretending to have missed it on purpose, so repeating the facts he's ignoring won't make…

He does have the advantage of being right though; I certainly didn't say anything like that untrained staff could administer a ventilator from a 30 day bootcamp. That is obviously stupid. Nobody in the thread did say that. The closest anyone came was pointing out it doesn't take 8 years to learn to administer a ventilator; which is uncontroversial. And that it takes less than 2 weeks to learn to press the buttons, which is also obviously true. Everybody knows they'd be killing people left and right proceeding like that left to their own devices.

Particularly my comment which seemed to spark something; it's a pretty basic fact that Ops Research people walk into situations where they aren't necessarily experts and optimise. That is a core part of the job. Every field is stuffed with experts who don't see how anyone could help them in their domain and they are generally wrong about the administrative trivia of organising a workplace. It doesn't even have anything to do with software. Ops Research is from mechanical engineering and factory optimisation.

I know bunch of doctors. I don't believe they work in an environment where the process has been mathematically optimised. They aren't mathematicians. That observation lines up very well with the "leave it to the experts" vibe of the responses here. They won't understand queuing theory for example.

Re: The U.S. tried to build a new fleet of ventilators

#342

Post by DonHopkins »

roenxi wrote: post #341
DonHopkins wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't anyone bother replying to this obvious sealioning troll technique. He has no intention of carrying out any kind of sincere argument, and his politeness is totally fake: he has no respect for anyone he's arguing with, he's just trying to waste everyone's time. Of course he saw it, but he didn't like what he saw, so now he's pretending to have missed it on purpose, so repeating the facts he's ignoring won't make…

He does have the advantage of being right though; I certainly didn't say anything like that untrained staff could administer a ventilator from a 30 day bootcamp. That is obviously stupid. Nobody in the thread did say that. The closest anyone came was pointing out it doesn't take 8 years to learn to administer a ventilator; which is uncontroversial. And that it takes less than 2 weeks to learn to press the buttons, wh…

Trolling by claiming to agree with people, and saying some things that happen to be right (while throwing much much more bullshit against the wall to see what sticks), and being insincerely and cloyingly polite, is still trolling, and classic sealioning behavior.

Take a look at his history. The first most obvious thing you will notice is how well the moderation system is working: so many of his postings are deeply downvoted (light gray text), flagged, and dead. But unfortunately he's still succeeding in wasting a whole lot of the moderator's and readers' time.

If you can stand to wade through his light gray walls of rambling incoherent text, you will see there is a consistency to how he writes, digresses, derails, pretends concern, contradicts himself, and regularly trolls and sealions.

As Jacques put it, "It's the online version of passive aggressive belligerence with a veneer of sincerity on top".

And when you try to pin him down on anything he actually believes, he retreats into his intellectual alt-right safe space, where it's impossible to truly know anything, and facts are a matter of opinion, since we live in a post truth society, and people all have their beliefs that they are entitled to, and everybody believes lies except for him, while nobody knows what he truly believes, but if you sincerely ask him, he derails and refuses to answer, and says you can't force him to answer your questions, because you're not the boss of him, and he's the victim.

Does that sound to you like the sincere conversation he claims he wants to have?

Re: The U.S. tried to build a new fleet of ventilators

#343

Post by roenxi »

DonHopkins wrote: post #342
roenxi wrote: post #341

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He does have the advantage of being right though; I certainly didn't say anything like that untrained staff could administer a ventilator from a 30 day bootcamp. That is obviously stupid. Nobody in the thread did say that. The closest anyone came was pointing out it doesn't take 8 years to learn to administer a ventilator; which is uncontroversial. And that it takes less than 2 weeks to learn to press the buttons, wh…

Trolling by claiming to agree with people, and saying some things that happen to be right (while throwing much much more bullshit against the wall to see what sticks), and being insincerely and cloyingly polite, is still trolling, and classic sealioning behavior. Take a look at his history. The first most obvious thing you will notice is how well the moderation system is working: so many of his postings are deeply do…

> Take a look at his history. The first most obvious thing you will notice is how well the moderation system is working: so many of his postings are deeply downvoted (light gray text), flagged, and dead. But unfortunately he's still succeeding in wasting a whole lot of the moderator's and readers' time.

That means that somewhere between 1 and 5 people don't like what he says. It is so consistent I actually suspect that someone has it out for him; there doesn't seem to be a particular link between what he is saying and the colour of the text.

> Trolling by claiming to agree with people, and saying some things that happen to be right (while throwing much much more bullshit against the wall to see what sticks), and being insincerely and cloyingly polite, is still trolling, and classic sealioning behavior.

If a sealion happens to be right I'm on the side of the sealion. Facts matter.

Re: The U.S. tried to build a new fleet of ventilators

#344

Post by omar_a1 »

roenxi wrote: post #343
DonHopkins wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Trolling by claiming to agree with people, and saying some things that happen to be right (while throwing much much more bullshit against the wall to see what sticks), and being insincerely and cloyingly polite, is still trolling, and classic sealioning behavior. Take a look at his history. The first most obvious thing you will notice is how well the moderation system is working: so many of his postings are deeply do…

> Take a look at his history. The first most obvious thing you will notice is how well the moderation system is working: so many of his postings are deeply downvoted (light gray text), flagged, and dead. But unfortunately he's still succeeding in wasting a whole lot of the moderator's and readers' time. That means that somewhere between 1 and 5 people don't like what he says. It is so consistent I actually suspect th…

> I certainly didn't say anything like that untrained staff could administer a ventilator from a 30 day bootcamp. That is obviously stupid. Nobody in the thread did say that.

> I wonder how long it would take to teach someone to be more help than harm? After 30 intensive days of training, what would candidates lack?

Facts do matter, you're right about that. Now, are we done quoting this thread to one another, or can I trust your reading comprehension? If you're still unclear on the matter, kindly ctrl-f, and re-read the thread as many times as needed to understand that which is plainly written.

I'm going to assume any further engagement of these types of questions are trolling, and will gladly flag it for moderation as such.

Re: The U.S. tried to build a new fleet of ventilators

#345

Post by roenxi »

omar_a1 wrote: post #344
roenxi wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Take a look at his history. The first most obvious thing you will notice is how well the moderation system is working: so many of his postings are deeply downvoted (light gray text), flagged, and dead. But unfortunately he's still succeeding in wasting a whole lot of the moderator's and readers' time. That means that somewhere between 1 and 5 people don't like what he says. It is so consistent I actually suspect th…

> I certainly didn't say anything like that untrained staff could administer a ventilator from a 30 day bootcamp. That is obviously stupid. Nobody in the thread did say that. > I wonder how long it would take to teach someone to be more help than harm? After 30 intensive days of training, what would candidates lack? Facts do matter, you're right about that. Now, are we done quoting this thread to one another, or can…

The issue with that quote is it ends in a question mark; which is typically used when people aren't entirely sure on a point and are seeking further information.

And it is a very fair question - given the number of people who are potentially going to asphyxiate this year it is reasonable to ask and have explained what the issues are surrounding ventilators. I don't know the answer to it, for example.

This is why I'm saying that mistermann had a point - questions aren't assertions. It isn't reasonable to interpret a question as an assertion. There isn't any evidence here of people looking down on the (rather lofty!) skills of the medical profession.

Re: The U.S. tried to build a new fleet of ventilators

#346

Post by omar_a1 »

roenxi wrote: post #345
omar_a1 wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I certainly didn't say anything like that untrained staff could administer a ventilator from a 30 day bootcamp. That is obviously stupid. Nobody in the thread did say that. > I wonder how long it would take to teach someone to be more help than harm? After 30 intensive days of training, what would candidates lack? Facts do matter, you're right about that. Now, are we done quoting this thread to one another, or can…

The issue with that quote is it ends in a question mark; which is typically used when people aren't entirely sure on a point and are seeking further information. And it is a very fair question - given the number of people who are potentially going to asphyxiate this year it is reasonable to ask and have explained what the issues are surrounding ventilators. I don't know the answer to it, for example. This is why I'm…

Asked, and answered. We're done here.

Re: The U.S. tried to build a new fleet of ventilators

#347

Post by DonHopkins »

omar_a1 wrote: post #346
roenxi wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue with that quote is it ends in a question mark; which is typically used when people aren't entirely sure on a point and are seeking further information. And it is a very fair question - given the number of people who are potentially going to asphyxiate this year it is reasonable to ask and have explained what the issues are surrounding ventilators. I don't know the answer to it, for example. This is why I'm…

Asked, and answered. We're done here.

I finally figured out who mistermann reminds me of, when he occasionally manages to say something that happens to be factually correct: Anne Elk!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKc_1gc1pLg

>"Ahem!"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs7r5xfucPs

>"Well, this theory of yours certainly seems to have hit the nail on the head."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49H8HuqEcFo

>"Not necessarily. I could be arguing in my spare time."

It's uncanny.

Re: The U.S. tried to build a new fleet of ventilators

#349

Post by lucretian »

alexandercrohde wrote: post #298
lucretian wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it's not good. in on study, 24/26 of pts with non-invasive mech ventilation and 31/32 of pts with invasive ventilation died. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... note that the study demographics were skewed to the more vulnerable cohorts (avg age = 56, range = 46-67, 62% male, 48% with a comorbidity).

Wow... I had no idea it was so low. Since you seem to be knowledgeable, if ventilating isn't a big-impact intervention, what's the point of flattening the curve? Is there some other intervention that hospital is doing that actually makes a more meaningful difference that can't be done at home? Or is it maybe just psychological?

i'm not sure. i'm not a doctor. at minimum, flattening the curve is buying time for therapies and vaccines.

that study may be overly pessimistic. elsewhere, i think i saw 50/50 survival rates for ventilated patients but i don't have a source at hand.

Re: The U.S. tried to build a new fleet of ventilators

#350

Post by robomartin »

syspec wrote: post #273
robomartin wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the fallacy with what you are saying: Click-through-rates are not going to increase because people signed-up for a free account with an email address. Greater revenue comes from greater traffic. Simple as that. If every time I see an interesting link from the NY Times and try to read it I am hit with a modal subscription request, well, very soon I just stop clicking NY Times links. The other side of that is pa…

All nytimes articles related to covid19 are free, but you do have to sign in

That’s my point, you should not have to sign in. Not to read articles about a world-wide pandemic. Normal stuff, sure.

Imagine if every media outlet and publisher took advantage of the crisis and required registration for access to information.

Post reply on HN