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

A Third Solution

paulbuchheit.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 535 posts

Re: A Third Solution

#401

Post by blueboo »

lend000 wrote: post #394
bsaul wrote: post #393

I can't help feeling a bit uneased reading about computer science people doing salespitch for solving a world epidemic. If a famous medical doctor was trying to convince me that his database product was really the best, while making grandiose statement, i think i'd be very very harsh with them.

This appeal to authority always bothers me. Polymaths are capable of making bigger contributions in any field they involve themselves in than the average phD can in their own field of expertise. Look at Musk, Tesla, Von Neumann, Hughes, Da Vinci, Edison, Ben Franklin. However, I wouldn't limit this to being a "genius" thing -- there may actually be something significant to being able to apply knowledge and patterns i…

Beware of congratulating yourself on spotting one fallacy (appeal to authority) while faceplanting into another (selection bias).

Re: A Third Solution

#402

Post by alex_young »

> Even with imperfect screening, if we are able to prevent 90% of disease transmission, then the virus’s reproductive number, or R0, will drop below one and the pandemic will quickly fade. There is no risk of reintroduction from the outside because any new outbreaks will quickly be caught and contained. If used consistently, there will be no second wave, ever.

This is dangerously wrong.

If you reduce R0 below 1, you may stop community spread. You will not eradicate it however, unless this is done globally for a prolonged period of time with no error. This cannot be done with the proposed solution.

We can (probably) stop this from hurting the vulnerable population while we find a long term solution like an inoculation, but we cannot just skip that and call everything good after some period of low / no new cases in a region.

Re: A Third Solution

#403

Post by fsh »

IshKebab wrote: post #395
bsaul wrote: post #393

I can't help feeling a bit uneased reading about computer science people doing salespitch for solving a world epidemic. If a famous medical doctor was trying to convince me that his database product was really the best, while making grandiose statement, i think i'd be very very harsh with them.

Modelling epidemics involves maths and programming. Of course programmers are going to have a go.

The proposed solution is not about modelling though. It is an advertisement for a completely unproven analytical technique.

Re: A Third Solution

#404

Post by laumars »

lend000 wrote: post #394
bsaul wrote: post #393

I can't help feeling a bit uneased reading about computer science people doing salespitch for solving a world epidemic. If a famous medical doctor was trying to convince me that his database product was really the best, while making grandiose statement, i think i'd be very very harsh with them.

This appeal to authority always bothers me. Polymaths are capable of making bigger contributions in any field they involve themselves in than the average phD can in their own field of expertise. Look at Musk, Tesla, Von Neumann, Hughes, Da Vinci, Edison, Ben Franklin. However, I wouldn't limit this to being a "genius" thing -- there may actually be something significant to being able to apply knowledge and patterns i…

Science and technology has moved on significantly since the Da Vinci days and modern day “geniuses” like Musk surround themselves with experts in each field.

On some topics you just have to accept that someone who has spent years of their live dedicated to a complex topic might actually be better placed to judge a solution than someone who specialises in an entirely unrelated field but happens to demonstrate a passing interest. Particularly when the topic is literally a matter of life or death.

Re: A Third Solution

#405

Post by post_below »

CPLX wrote: post #399
lend000 wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This appeal to authority always bothers me. Polymaths are capable of making bigger contributions in any field they involve themselves in than the average phD can in their own field of expertise. Look at Musk, Tesla, Von Neumann, Hughes, Da Vinci, Edison, Ben Franklin. However, I wouldn't limit this to being a "genius" thing -- there may actually be something significant to being able to apply knowledge and patterns i…

Citing Elon Musk in this context is definitely not making the point you think it’s making.

Why not? It doesn't matter if he's... Elon Musk. What he's accomplished in fields he wasn't trained in is significant. I think that makes OPs point just fine.

Re: A Third Solution

#406

Post by smhg »

I think it is a good idea to keep some interpretation of the stages of grief [0] in the back of your head while reading posts like these (especially now, related to SARS-CoV-2).

I don't want to say they are all wrong, but you tend to see the type of responses evolve as countries are further down the whole lockdown-process.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model

Re: A Third Solution

#407

Post by __blockcipher__ »

alex_young wrote: post #402

> Even with imperfect screening, if we are able to prevent 90% of disease transmission, then the virus’s reproductive number, or R0, will drop below one and the pandemic will quickly fade. There is no risk of reintroduction from the outside because any new outbreaks will quickly be caught and contained. If used consistently, there will be no second wave, ever. This is dangerously wrong. If you reduce R0 below 1, you…

Also remember this is literally a virus that emerged from animals in the first place (zoonotic transmission).

There will always be animal reservoirs of this.

For that reason, and those you outlined, we could achieve the flawless techno-totalitarian state that so many well-intentioned citizens are practically begging for, and we would still be screwed.

The only stable long-term solution is widespread exposure; ie how humanity has dealt with pretty much every other global pandemic we’ve been encountered with.

Thus why those who are trying to demonize the concept of “herd immunity” and make it a dirty word are playing a very dangerous game.

Re: A Third Solution

#408

Post by jwdunne »

bsaul wrote: post #393

I can't help feeling a bit uneased reading about computer science people doing salespitch for solving a world epidemic. If a famous medical doctor was trying to convince me that his database product was really the best, while making grandiose statement, i think i'd be very very harsh with them.

It’s not really his solution though is it? WHO has been urging governments to “test test test” for months with the same argument. In fact, the UK government is currently being criticised for not testing enough. Other countries that test more have shown a lower death rate (Germany at one point, not sure of the figures today) at odds with neighbouring states. Between lockdown and waiting for a vaccine, this is the only other thing that’s been suggested that makes sense. It’s not like the author is recommending injections of bleach.

Re: A Third Solution

#409

Post by lend000 »

laumars wrote: post #404
lend000 wrote: post #394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This appeal to authority always bothers me. Polymaths are capable of making bigger contributions in any field they involve themselves in than the average phD can in their own field of expertise. Look at Musk, Tesla, Von Neumann, Hughes, Da Vinci, Edison, Ben Franklin. However, I wouldn't limit this to being a "genius" thing -- there may actually be something significant to being able to apply knowledge and patterns i…

Science and technology has moved on significantly since the Da Vinci days and modern day “geniuses” like Musk surround themselves with experts in each field. On some topics you just have to accept that someone who has spent years of their live dedicated to a complex topic might actually be better placed to judge a solution than someone who specialises in an entirely unrelated field but happens to demonstrate a passin…

On average, sure. And that may be a rational reason for a busy investor to reject a pitch meeting, but that's never a reason to dismiss an idea once you've read it, or in a forum where there is no cost to that idea existing (such as HN).

Re: A Third Solution

#410

Post by fsh »

post_below wrote: post #405
CPLX wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Citing Elon Musk in this context is definitely not making the point you think it’s making.

Why not? It doesn't matter if he's... Elon Musk. What he's accomplished in fields he wasn't trained in is significant. I think that makes OPs point just fine.

Unlike the other people in the list, Musk (and Huges) have never made a significant scientific discovery or invention.
Post reply on HN