Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

All things Rugby
User avatar
6.Jones
Posts: 2972
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by 6.Jones »

Bindi wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:
6.Jones wrote:I do. Gwenno certainly does. Echo undoubtedly does. People like Sewa and Raggs. I'm insulting others by their non-inclusion.
Really? To my understanding the actual experts advising world governments are still struggling to piece it all together. I asked advice from my father recently --a retired surgeon of over 45 years experience-- and his response was that he's not qualified to comment because it's not his field, but just take one day at a time. It was a bit disappointing, I'd liked to have armed myself with some insider knowledge, but at that moment I felt quite proud of him. My mother is also a highly experienced intensive care nurse who has actually been called onto a special response team for coronavirus owning to her experience. She also says they don't really know what they're dealing with yet.

So I don't know what your and other boardies qualifications are, but even if you are all vastly experienced in statistical analysis of pandemics based on very much incomplete data, the experts advice that I have read is to stay off social media and avoid spreading "fake news", and that sounds reasonable. Certainly more reasonable than daily refreshes of some random death-statistics page followed by rampant speculation about what it might mean.
No you don't know what our qualifications are.
I'm a virologist, if that helps.
I'm a statistician. We should get our shit together.

Not in a gay way.
Nolanator
Posts: 38830
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Nolanator »

I'm a materials scientist. I can tell you all about physical vapour deposition of metal oxides and electrochemical energy stuff.

Clearly, that's an extremely useful collection of skills in this discussion. :thumbup:
User avatar
Bindi
Posts: 7404
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Plum

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Bindi »

6.Jones wrote:
Bindi wrote:
6.Jones wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:
6.Jones wrote:I do. Gwenno certainly does. Echo undoubtedly does. People like Sewa and Raggs. I'm insulting others by their non-inclusion.
Really? To my understanding the actual experts advising world governments are still struggling to piece it all together. I asked advice from my father recently --a retired surgeon of over 45 years experience-- and his response was that he's not qualified to comment because it's not his field, but just take one day at a time. It was a bit disappointing, I'd liked to have armed myself with some insider knowledge, but at that moment I felt quite proud of him. My mother is also a highly experienced intensive care nurse who has actually been called onto a special response team for coronavirus owning to her experience. She also says they don't really know what they're dealing with yet.

So I don't know what your and other boardies qualifications are, but even if you are all vastly experienced in statistical analysis of pandemics based on very much incomplete data, the experts advice that I have read is to stay off social media and avoid spreading "fake news", and that sounds reasonable. Certainly more reasonable than daily refreshes of some random death-statistics page followed by rampant speculation about what it might mean.
No you don't know what our qualifications are.
I'm a virologist, if that helps.
I'm a statistician. We should get our shit together.

Not in a gay way.
I've already got Jeff on my bike, but there's room for one more.
Spoiler: show
Image
de_Selby
Posts: 3792
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 5:47 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by de_Selby »

I'm a fan of the Joe Rogan podcast, which I think gives me a unique skillset to be able to asses when everyone else on this thread is talking shite.
User avatar
Mog The Almighty
Posts: 12475
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:33 am
Location: Stockholm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Mog The Almighty »

Bindi wrote:I'm a virologist, if that helps.
My god, we are f**ked if that's true.

Aren't you the one that told everyone, "washing your hands doesn't do shit"? ... and has also hoarded a mountain of toilet paper and proudly posted photos of the collection? Does this virus cause explosive shits in your expert opinion?
User avatar
6.Jones
Posts: 2972
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by 6.Jones »

de_Selby wrote:I'm a fan of the Joe Rogan podcast, which I think gives me a unique skillset to be able to asses when everyone else on this thread is talking shite.
Russell's Set Paradox.
User avatar
alliswell
Posts: 10418
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: location, location

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by alliswell »

Mog The Almighty wrote:
Bindi wrote:I'm a virologist, if that helps.
My god, we are f**ked if that's true.

Aren't you the one that told everyone, "washing your hands doesn't do shit"? ... and has also hoarded a mountain of toilet paper and proudly posted photos of the collection? Does this virus cause explosive shits in your expert opinion?
Aren't you the one who said he was pissing off?
User avatar
Bindi
Posts: 7404
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Plum

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Bindi »

Seneca of the Night wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:
Yes, scientific argument is good. But this isn't a scientific forum, we're not researchers involved in the peer review process. Laymen arguing over brain surgery they barely comprehend based on the Google search they did in their lunch break is not helpful at all, it's just silly and the same applies to virology.
But Mog, I am a viral memester. Does that count?
I got a paper accepted yesterday in the journal Viruses. It's not that great, and I'm staring think it was just to spite Mog.
User avatar
hermes-trismegistus
Posts: 3250
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by hermes-trismegistus »

Mog The Almighty wrote:Really? To my understanding the actual experts advising world governments are still struggling to piece it all together. I asked advice from my father recently --a retired surgeon of over 45 years experience-- and his response was that he's not qualified to comment because it's not his field, but just take one day at a time. It was a bit disappointing, I'd liked to have armed myself with some insider knowledge, but at that moment I felt quite proud of him. My mother is also a highly experienced intensive care nurse who has actually been called onto a special response team for coronavirus owning to her experience. She also says they don't really know what they're dealing with yet.

So I don't know what your and other boardies qualifications are, but even if you are all vastly experienced in statistical analysis of pandemics based on very much incomplete data, the experts advice that I have read is to stay off social media and avoid spreading "fake news", and that sounds reasonable. Certainly more reasonable than daily refreshes of some random death-statistics page followed by rampant speculation about what it might mean.
Mog, seriously.

Apart from anything else, this is the biggest news story the world has seen in a generation, one which - if you read Tafano's last post or any others from the Italian brigade - will likely touch the lives of quite a few here in a very direct and gruesome way. People can and should hold forth on it, irrespective of whether or not their credentials meet with your standards. It's healthy. Besides, although there's been some disagreement on the thread, no one has tried to prescribe a course of action to anyone else, which is really the only scenario in which your grumblings would have some valid traction. Well, no one apart from - in a way - you.
User avatar
Bindi
Posts: 7404
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Plum

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Bindi »

alliswell wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:
Bindi wrote:I'm a virologist, if that helps.
My god, we are f**ked if that's true.

Aren't you the one that told everyone, "washing your hands doesn't do shit"? ... and has also hoarded a mountain of toilet paper and proudly posted photos of the collection? Does this virus cause explosive shits in your expert opinion?
Aren't you the one who said he was pissing off?
Photos of my collection? Interesting.
User avatar
hermes-trismegistus
Posts: 3250
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by hermes-trismegistus »

Kiwias wrote:There is a fascinating article in the FT about afterwards.

https://www.ft.com/content/19d90308-685 ... e6fedcca75
Paywall, Kiwias. Any chance of a C&P?
User avatar
6.Jones
Posts: 2972
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by 6.Jones »

Bindi wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:
Yes, scientific argument is good. But this isn't a scientific forum, we're not researchers involved in the peer review process. Laymen arguing over brain surgery they barely comprehend based on the Google search they did in their lunch break is not helpful at all, it's just silly and the same applies to virology.
But Mog, I am a viral memester. Does that count?
I got a paper accepted yesterday in the journal Viruses. It's not that great, and I'm staring think it was just to spite Mog.
Will it then appear in many journals?
User avatar
Bindi
Posts: 7404
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Plum

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Bindi »

6.Jones wrote:
Bindi wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:
Yes, scientific argument is good. But this isn't a scientific forum, we're not researchers involved in the peer review process. Laymen arguing over brain surgery they barely comprehend based on the Google search they did in their lunch break is not helpful at all, it's just silly and the same applies to virology.
But Mog, I am a viral memester. Does that count?
I got a paper accepted yesterday in the journal Viruses. It's not that great, and I'm staring think it was just to spite Mog.
Will it then appear in many journals?
Twice as many journals every three days.
User avatar
Winnie
Posts: 16406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:18 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Winnie »

happyhooker wrote:
slick wrote:I've spent the morning battling with 3 multi national companies that are refusing to pay £500 invoices, that are very overdue, because of the current crisis. f**king plum.
Tell me about it
Same here
Some of our clients are asking to get out of their contracts
Its a fine line between us surviving and not looking like d1cks in a time of worldwide emergency and downturn
User avatar
Bindi
Posts: 7404
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Plum

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Bindi »

Seneca of the Night wrote:
Bindi wrote:
Seneca of the Night wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:
Yes, scientific argument is good. But this isn't a scientific forum, we're not researchers involved in the peer review process. Laymen arguing over brain surgery they barely comprehend based on the Google search they did in their lunch break is not helpful at all, it's just silly and the same applies to virology.
But Mog, I am a viral memester. Does that count?
I got a paper accepted yesterday in the journal Viruses. It's not that great, and I'm staring think it was just to spite Mog.
I got a gif accepted in the same journal. :thumbup:
I saw that. Surprised it passed peer review.

Image
Flyin Ryan
Posts: 10560
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Indiana

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Flyin Ryan »

Winnie wrote:
happyhooker wrote:
slick wrote:I've spent the morning battling with 3 multi national companies that are refusing to pay £500 invoices, that are very overdue, because of the current crisis. f**king plum.
Tell me about it
Same here
Some of our clients are asking to get out of their contracts
Its a fine line between us surviving and not looking like d1cks in a time of worldwide emergency and downturn
I know I don't do business financials and it's the best for me that I don't, but what the fudge is wrong with having a savings account, or to put it in business terms, a "rainy day fund"?
User avatar
sewa
Posts: 21810
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by sewa »

Bindi wrote:
6.Jones wrote: Will it then appear in many journals?
Twice as many journals every three days.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
User avatar
6.Jones
Posts: 2972
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by 6.Jones »

hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:Really? To my understanding the actual experts advising world governments are still struggling to piece it all together. I asked advice from my father recently --a retired surgeon of over 45 years experience-- and his response was that he's not qualified to comment because it's not his field, but just take one day at a time. It was a bit disappointing, I'd liked to have armed myself with some insider knowledge, but at that moment I felt quite proud of him. My mother is also a highly experienced intensive care nurse who has actually been called onto a special response team for coronavirus owning to her experience. She also says they don't really know what they're dealing with yet.

So I don't know what your and other boardies qualifications are, but even if you are all vastly experienced in statistical analysis of pandemics based on very much incomplete data, the experts advice that I have read is to stay off social media and avoid spreading "fake news", and that sounds reasonable. Certainly more reasonable than daily refreshes of some random death-statistics page followed by rampant speculation about what it might mean.
Mog, seriously.

Apart from anything else, this is the biggest news story the world has seen in a generation, one which - if you read Tafano's last post or any others from the Italian brigade - will likely touch the lives of quite a few here in a very direct and gruesome way. People can and should hold forth on it, irrespective of whether or not their credentials meet with your standards. It's healthy. Besides, although there's been some disagreement on the thread, no one has tried to prescribe a course of action to anyone else, which is really the only scenario in which your grumblings would have some valid traction. Well, no one apart from - in a way - you.
I think even more then hold forth we should examine everything governments say. They don't always tell the truth. They don't always act in our best interests. The UK government walked back herd immunity because of the public outcry, led by a pushback by scientists not in the decision making process.
User avatar
hermes-trismegistus
Posts: 3250
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by hermes-trismegistus »

6.Jones wrote:
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:Really? To my understanding the actual experts advising world governments are still struggling to piece it all together. I asked advice from my father recently --a retired surgeon of over 45 years experience-- and his response was that he's not qualified to comment because it's not his field, but just take one day at a time. It was a bit disappointing, I'd liked to have armed myself with some insider knowledge, but at that moment I felt quite proud of him. My mother is also a highly experienced intensive care nurse who has actually been called onto a special response team for coronavirus owning to her experience. She also says they don't really know what they're dealing with yet.

So I don't know what your and other boardies qualifications are, but even if you are all vastly experienced in statistical analysis of pandemics based on very much incomplete data, the experts advice that I have read is to stay off social media and avoid spreading "fake news", and that sounds reasonable. Certainly more reasonable than daily refreshes of some random death-statistics page followed by rampant speculation about what it might mean.
Mog, seriously.

Apart from anything else, this is the biggest news story the world has seen in a generation, one which - if you read Tafano's last post or any others from the Italian brigade - will likely touch the lives of quite a few here in a very direct and gruesome way. People can and should hold forth on it, irrespective of whether or not their credentials meet with your standards. It's healthy. Besides, although there's been some disagreement on the thread, no one has tried to prescribe a course of action to anyone else, which is really the only scenario in which your grumblings would have some valid traction. Well, no one apart from - in a way - you.
I think even more then hold forth we should examine everything governments say. They don't always tell the truth. They don't always act in our best interests. The UK government walked back herd immunity because of the public outcry, led by a pushback by scientists not in the decision making process.
There's a lot at stake. And absolutely everyone has skin in the game. So, yes. Interrogate everything you're told.
User avatar
Bindi
Posts: 7404
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Plum

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Bindi »

6.Jones wrote:
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:Really? To my understanding the actual experts advising world governments are still struggling to piece it all together. I asked advice from my father recently --a retired surgeon of over 45 years experience-- and his response was that he's not qualified to comment because it's not his field, but just take one day at a time. It was a bit disappointing, I'd liked to have armed myself with some insider knowledge, but at that moment I felt quite proud of him. My mother is also a highly experienced intensive care nurse who has actually been called onto a special response team for coronavirus owning to her experience. She also says they don't really know what they're dealing with yet.

So I don't know what your and other boardies qualifications are, but even if you are all vastly experienced in statistical analysis of pandemics based on very much incomplete data, the experts advice that I have read is to stay off social media and avoid spreading "fake news", and that sounds reasonable. Certainly more reasonable than daily refreshes of some random death-statistics page followed by rampant speculation about what it might mean.
Mog, seriously.

Apart from anything else, this is the biggest news story the world has seen in a generation, one which - if you read Tafano's last post or any others from the Italian brigade - will likely touch the lives of quite a few here in a very direct and gruesome way. People can and should hold forth on it, irrespective of whether or not their credentials meet with your standards. It's healthy. Besides, although there's been some disagreement on the thread, no one has tried to prescribe a course of action to anyone else, which is really the only scenario in which your grumblings would have some valid traction. Well, no one apart from - in a way - you.
I think even more then hold forth we should examine everything governments say. They don't always tell the truth. They don't always act in our best interests. The UK government walked back herd immunity because of the public outcry, led by a pushback by scientists not in the decision making process.
Most definitely. I'd add, anyone who knows anything about science knows that opinion is all over the place at the cutting edge. There's no one group of experts that hold all the knowledge. Takes ages for all the shit theories to pass out of the system (often from very good scientists).

That's why something like the fundamentals of climate science are rock solid, but those of the of a virus first identified 80 days ago are not.
User avatar
Kiwias
Posts: 41473
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Kiwias »

hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Kiwias wrote:There is a fascinating article in the FT about afterwards.

https://www.ft.com/content/19d90308-685 ... e6fedcca75
Paywall, Kiwias. Any chance of a C&P?
Weird. It displayed in full the first time I clicked the link but I am told to stop being a cheap bastard and subscribe to FT (which I have never done). Sorry about that.

The thrust was not to let the rush to monitor residents' movement, something that can look to have significant advantages when trying to deal with a pandemic such as this, take over our lives in ways we did not envisage but that are becoming increasingly technically possible, but with possibly highly unwelcome outcomes.

Or something along those lines. It was written by Yuval Noah Harari and was entitled "The world after coronavirus" with this opening line.
"This storm will pass. But the choices we make now could change our lives....."
User avatar
Mog The Almighty
Posts: 12475
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:33 am
Location: Stockholm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Mog The Almighty »

hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:Really? To my understanding the actual experts advising world governments are still struggling to piece it all together. I asked advice from my father recently --a retired surgeon of over 45 years experience-- and his response was that he's not qualified to comment because it's not his field, but just take one day at a time. It was a bit disappointing, I'd liked to have armed myself with some insider knowledge, but at that moment I felt quite proud of him. My mother is also a highly experienced intensive care nurse who has actually been called onto a special response team for coronavirus owning to her experience. She also says they don't really know what they're dealing with yet.

So I don't know what your and other boardies qualifications are, but even if you are all vastly experienced in statistical analysis of pandemics based on very much incomplete data, the experts advice that I have read is to stay off social media and avoid spreading "fake news", and that sounds reasonable. Certainly more reasonable than daily refreshes of some random death-statistics page followed by rampant speculation about what it might mean.
Mog, seriously.

Apart from anything else, this is the biggest news story the world has seen in a generation, one which - if you read Tafano's last post or any others from the Italian brigade - will likely touch the lives of quite a few here in a very direct and gruesome way. People can and should hold forth on it, irrespective of whether or not their credentials meet with your standards. It's healthy. Besides, although there's been some disagreement on the thread, no one has tried to prescribe a course of action to anyone else, which is really the only scenario in which your grumblings would have some valid traction. Well, no one apart from - in a way - you.
There's no problem with discussing it, it's obviously huge news. I'm sure whatever Kiwias posted, for example, would be fascinating, Yuval Noah Harari is an incredibly interesting guy, but it's unfortunately behind a pay wall. Of course it's reasonable to discuss it! What I am objecting to is non-experts analyzing incomplete & complicated data on a subject they are not qualified to draw conclusions on and then blasting off their "findings" into cyberspace. Not only in this thread, but on social media in general. Misinformation and hype has never turned out to be a good thing in a time of crisis.

That's my point here, not "telling everyone what to do". Sorry if it comes across like that.

In addition, for everyone's sanity it's probably also good to at least try and be a bit positive. Okay, the positive-information thread didn't go well, I understand that, too soon. But let's at least not concentrate on gossiping over the worst case scenarios? Still no? Okay ... well how about we don't concentrate on worst case scenarios that are just pure unqualified speculation? No, not that either? Okay I'll f-ck off.
User avatar
Calculus
Posts: 3830
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Calculus »

MungoMan wrote:Germany: 16,000+ cases; 44 deaths.

Yeah. Right.

Next time some squarehead says anything purportedly serious, the best course would be to laugh and suggest they STFU. Because lying cúnts.

And if someone here on the bored wishes to show a bit of EuroSolidarity and defend their Teutonic brethren, go right ahead.
Since I'm of kraut descent I will defend their honour. From what I've read, it's simply the German testing a lot more people, and testing a lot of younger people who are less likely to end up dying.

https://inews.co.uk/news/health/coronav ... 502388?amp
Last edited by Calculus on Fri Mar 20, 2020 2:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Rinkals
Posts: 17659
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Rinkals »

hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:Really? To my understanding the actual experts advising world governments are still struggling to piece it all together. I asked advice from my father recently --a retired surgeon of over 45 years experience-- and his response was that he's not qualified to comment because it's not his field, but just take one day at a time. It was a bit disappointing, I'd liked to have armed myself with some insider knowledge, but at that moment I felt quite proud of him. My mother is also a highly experienced intensive care nurse who has actually been called onto a special response team for coronavirus owning to her experience. She also says they don't really know what they're dealing with yet.

So I don't know what your and other boardies qualifications are, but even if you are all vastly experienced in statistical analysis of pandemics based on very much incomplete data, the experts advice that I have read is to stay off social media and avoid spreading "fake news", and that sounds reasonable. Certainly more reasonable than daily refreshes of some random death-statistics page followed by rampant speculation about what it might mean.
Mog, seriously.

Apart from anything else, this is the biggest news story the world has seen in a generation, one which - if you read Tafano's last post or any others from the Italian brigade - will likely touch the lives of quite a few here in a very direct and gruesome way. People can and should hold forth on it, irrespective of whether or not their credentials meet with your standards. It's healthy. Besides, although there's been some disagreement on the thread, no one has tried to prescribe a course of action to anyone else, which is really the only scenario in which your grumblings would have some valid traction. Well, no one apart from - in a way - you.
I have to agree that, if ever there was a valid reason to belong to a forum, the opportunity to discuss matters of grave importance for the world with posters scattered around the globe would be compelling.

Perhaps that's why I get so irritated with Seneca's glib arrogance and Bimbo's know-it-all Dunning-Kruger output; they devalue what I consider to be a useful resource, especially when there appear to be posters who actually know what they are talking about.
shereblue
Posts: 4384
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by shereblue »

Kiwias wrote:
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Kiwias wrote:There is a fascinating article in the FT about afterwards.

https://www.ft.com/content/19d90308-685 ... e6fedcca75
Paywall, Kiwias. Any chance of a C&P?
Weird. It displayed in full the first time I clicked the link but I am told to stop being a cheap bastard and subscribe to FT (which I have never done). Sorry about that.

The thrust was not to let the rush to monitor residents' movement, something that can look to have significant advantages when trying to deal with a pandemic such as this, take over our lives in ways we did not envisage but that are becoming increasingly technically possible, but with possibly highly unwelcome outcomes.

Or something along those lines. It was written by Yuval Noah Harari and was entitled "The world after coronavirus" with this opening line.
"This storm will pass. But the choices we make now could change our lives....."
Not intending to make this about Israel but merely providing a cited example of your interesting points on monitoring of movement and the possibility of wider political changes when we start to emerge from all this:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/in-depth ... spartanntp
User avatar
hermes-trismegistus
Posts: 3250
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by hermes-trismegistus »

Mog The Almighty wrote:
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:Really? To my understanding the actual experts advising world governments are still struggling to piece it all together. I asked advice from my father recently --a retired surgeon of over 45 years experience-- and his response was that he's not qualified to comment because it's not his field, but just take one day at a time. It was a bit disappointing, I'd liked to have armed myself with some insider knowledge, but at that moment I felt quite proud of him. My mother is also a highly experienced intensive care nurse who has actually been called onto a special response team for coronavirus owning to her experience. She also says they don't really know what they're dealing with yet.

So I don't know what your and other boardies qualifications are, but even if you are all vastly experienced in statistical analysis of pandemics based on very much incomplete data, the experts advice that I have read is to stay off social media and avoid spreading "fake news", and that sounds reasonable. Certainly more reasonable than daily refreshes of some random death-statistics page followed by rampant speculation about what it might mean.
Mog, seriously.

Apart from anything else, this is the biggest news story the world has seen in a generation, one which - if you read Tafano's last post or any others from the Italian brigade - will likely touch the lives of quite a few here in a very direct and gruesome way. People can and should hold forth on it, irrespective of whether or not their credentials meet with your standards. It's healthy. Besides, although there's been some disagreement on the thread, no one has tried to prescribe a course of action to anyone else, which is really the only scenario in which your grumblings would have some valid traction. Well, no one apart from - in a way - you.
There's no problem with discussing it, it's obviously huge news. I'm sure whatever Kiwias posted, for example, would be fascinating, Yuval Noah Harari is an incredibly interesting guy, but it's unfortunately behind a pay wall. Of course it's reasonable to discuss it! What I am objecting to is non-experts analyzing incomplete & complicated data on a subject they are not qualified to draw conclusions on and then blasting off their "findings" into cyberspace. Not only in this thread, but on social media in general. Misinformation and hype has never turned out to be a good thing in a time of crisis.

That's my point here, not "telling everyone what to do". Sorry if it comes across like that.

In addition, for everyone's sanity it's probably also good to at least try and be a bit positive. Okay, the positive-information thread didn't go well, I understand that, too soon. But let's at least not concentrate on gossiping over the worst case scenarios? Still no? Okay ... well how about we don't concentrate on worst case scenarios that are just pure unqualified speculation? No, not that either? Okay I'll f-ck off.
Before you, f'ck off. I totally agree with you on the positive stuff. Really essential to have some hope at times like this. In fact, I don't think most people can cope through this kind of prolonged dark situation without some upbeat morsels sprinkled into the diet. The good news thread was a great idea.
User avatar
6.Jones
Posts: 2972
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2019 2:59 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by 6.Jones »

shereblue wrote:
Kiwias wrote:
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Kiwias wrote:There is a fascinating article in the FT about afterwards.

https://www.ft.com/content/19d90308-685 ... e6fedcca75
Paywall, Kiwias. Any chance of a C&P?
Weird. It displayed in full the first time I clicked the link but I am told to stop being a cheap bastard and subscribe to FT (which I have never done). Sorry about that.

The thrust was not to let the rush to monitor residents' movement, something that can look to have significant advantages when trying to deal with a pandemic such as this, take over our lives in ways we did not envisage but that are becoming increasingly technically possible, but with possibly highly unwelcome outcomes.

Or something along those lines. It was written by Yuval Noah Harari and was entitled "The world after coronavirus" with this opening line.
"This storm will pass. But the choices we make now could change our lives....."
Not intending to make this about Israel but merely providing a cited example of your interesting points on monitoring of movement and the possibility of wider political changes when we start to emerge from all this:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/in-depth ... spartanntp
Netanyahu's between a rock and a hard place. This is his chance. He may not be the last.
User avatar
hermes-trismegistus
Posts: 3250
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by hermes-trismegistus »

Kiwias wrote:
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Kiwias wrote:There is a fascinating article in the FT about afterwards.

https://www.ft.com/content/19d90308-685 ... e6fedcca75
Paywall, Kiwias. Any chance of a C&P?
Weird. It displayed in full the first time I clicked the link but I am told to stop being a cheap bastard and subscribe to FT (which I have never done). Sorry about that.

The thrust was not to let the rush to monitor residents' movement, something that can look to have significant advantages when trying to deal with a pandemic such as this, take over our lives in ways we did not envisage but that are becoming increasingly technically possible, but with possibly highly unwelcome outcomes.

Or something along those lines. It was written by Yuval Noah Harari and was entitled "The world after coronavirus" with this opening line.
"This storm will pass. But the choices we make now could change our lives....."
Oh, well. Thanks for trying, K.

Agree with the gist. The potential for monitoring tech for example to be installled on everyone's phones and play a positive role is huge. But you'd be mad not to see it as a Pandora's box.
User avatar
Mog The Almighty
Posts: 12475
Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2013 11:33 am
Location: Stockholm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Mog The Almighty »

hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:
hermes-trismegistus wrote:
Mog The Almighty wrote:Really? To my understanding the actual experts advising world governments are still struggling to piece it all together. I asked advice from my father recently --a retired surgeon of over 45 years experience-- and his response was that he's not qualified to comment because it's not his field, but just take one day at a time. It was a bit disappointing, I'd liked to have armed myself with some insider knowledge, but at that moment I felt quite proud of him. My mother is also a highly experienced intensive care nurse who has actually been called onto a special response team for coronavirus owning to her experience. She also says they don't really know what they're dealing with yet.

So I don't know what your and other boardies qualifications are, but even if you are all vastly experienced in statistical analysis of pandemics based on very much incomplete data, the experts advice that I have read is to stay off social media and avoid spreading "fake news", and that sounds reasonable. Certainly more reasonable than daily refreshes of some random death-statistics page followed by rampant speculation about what it might mean.
Mog, seriously.

Apart from anything else, this is the biggest news story the world has seen in a generation, one which - if you read Tafano's last post or any others from the Italian brigade - will likely touch the lives of quite a few here in a very direct and gruesome way. People can and should hold forth on it, irrespective of whether or not their credentials meet with your standards. It's healthy. Besides, although there's been some disagreement on the thread, no one has tried to prescribe a course of action to anyone else, which is really the only scenario in which your grumblings would have some valid traction. Well, no one apart from - in a way - you.
There's no problem with discussing it, it's obviously huge news. I'm sure whatever Kiwias posted, for example, would be fascinating, Yuval Noah Harari is an incredibly interesting guy, but it's unfortunately behind a pay wall. Of course it's reasonable to discuss it! What I am objecting to is non-experts analyzing incomplete & complicated data on a subject they are not qualified to draw conclusions on and then blasting off their "findings" into cyberspace. Not only in this thread, but on social media in general. Misinformation and hype has never turned out to be a good thing in a time of crisis.

That's my point here, not "telling everyone what to do". Sorry if it comes across like that.

In addition, for everyone's sanity it's probably also good to at least try and be a bit positive. Okay, the positive-information thread didn't go well, I understand that, too soon. But let's at least not concentrate on gossiping over the worst case scenarios? Still no? Okay ... well how about we don't concentrate on worst case scenarios that are just pure unqualified speculation? No, not that either? Okay I'll f-ck off.
Before you, f'ck off. I totally agree with you on the positive stuff. Really essential to have some hope at times like this. In fact, I don't think most people can cope through this kind of prolonged dark situation without some upbeat morsels sprinkled into the diet. The good news thread was a great idea.
Thanks. :)
User avatar
Kahu
Posts: 3681
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2015 12:58 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Kahu »

I reckon MOGs olds gave him the answer he could do the least damage with
User avatar
Bindi
Posts: 7404
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Plum

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Bindi »

Actually find some solace in /r/COVID19/
User avatar
kiap
Posts: 20043
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by kiap »

Naughty of me, and it's a very long article. I have wrapped the sections in spoilers ...

Yuval Noah Harari: the world after coronavirus

This storm will pass. But the choices we make now could change our lives for years to come

Yuval Noah Harari 8 hours ago

Humankind is now facing a global crisis. Perhaps the biggest crisis of our generation. The decisions people and governments take in the next few weeks will probably shape the world for years to come. They will shape not just our healthcare systems but also our economy, politics and culture. We must act quickly and decisively. We should also take into account the long-term consequences of our actions. When choosing between alternatives, we should ask ourselves not only how to overcome the immediate threat, but also what kind of world we will inhabit once the storm passes. Yes, the storm will pass, humankind will survive, most of us will still be alive — but we will inhabit a different world.

Many short-term emergency measures will become a fixture of life. That is the nature of emergencies. They fast-forward historical processes. Decisions that in normal times could take years of deliberation are passed in a matter of hours. Immature and even dangerous technologies are pressed into service, because the risks of doing nothing are bigger. Entire countries serve as guinea-pigs in large-scale social experiments. What happens when everybody works from home and communicates only at a distance? What happens when entire schools and universities go online? In normal times, governments, businesses and educational boards would never agree to conduct such experiments. But these aren’t normal times.

In this time of crisis, we face two particularly important choices. The first is between totalitarian surveillance and citizen empowerment. The second is between nationalist isolation and global solidarity.
----
  • About the photography: The images accompanying this article are taken from webcams overlooking the deserted streets of Italy, found and manipulated by Graziano Panfili, a photographer living under lockdown
-----
Under-the-skin surveillance: show
In order to stop the epidemic, entire populations need to comply with certain guidelines. There are two main ways of achieving this. One method is for the government to monitor people, and punish those who break the rules. Today, for the first time in human history, technology makes it possible to monitor everyone all the time. Fifty years ago, the KGB couldn’t follow 240m Soviet citizens 24 hours a day, nor could the KGB hope to effectively process all the information gathered. The KGB relied on human agents and analysts, and it just couldn’t place a human agent to follow every citizen. But now governments can rely on ubiquitous sensors and powerful algorithms instead of flesh-and-blood spooks.

In their battle against the coronavirus epidemic several governments have already deployed the new surveillance tools. The most notable case is China. By closely monitoring people’s smartphones, making use of hundreds of millions of face-recognising cameras, and obliging people to check and report their body temperature and medical condition, the Chinese authorities can not only quickly identify suspected coronavirus carriers, but also track their movements and identify anyone they came into contact with. A range of mobile apps warn citizens about their proximity to infected patients.

This kind of technology is not limited to east Asia. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel recently authorised the Israel Security Agency to deploy surveillance technology normally reserved for battling terrorists to track coronavirus patients. When the relevant parliamentary subcommittee refused to authorise the measure, Netanyahu rammed it through with an “emergency decree”.

You might argue that there is nothing new about all this. In recent years both governments and corporations have been using ever more sophisticated technologies to track, monitor and manipulate people. Yet if we are not careful, the epidemic might nevertheless mark an important watershed in the history of surveillance. Not only because it might normalise the deployment of mass surveillance tools in countries that have so far rejected them, but even more so because it signifies a dramatic transition from “over the skin” to “under the skin” surveillance.

Hitherto, when your finger touched the screen of your smartphone and clicked on a link, the government wanted to know what exactly your finger was clicking on. But with coronavirus, the focus of interest shifts. Now the government wants to know the temperature of your finger and the blood-pressure under its skin.
The emergency pudding: show
One of the problems we face in working out where we stand on surveillance is that none of us know exactly how we are being surveilled, and what the coming years might bring. Surveillance technology is developing at breakneck speed, and what seemed science-fiction 10 years ago is today old news. As a thought experiment, consider a hypothetical government that demands that every citizen wears a biometric bracelet that monitors body temperature and heart-rate 24 hours a day. The resulting data is hoarded and analysed by government algorithms. The algorithms will know that you are sick even before you know it, and they will also know where you have been, and who you have met. The chains of infection could be drastically shortened, and even cut altogether. Such a system could arguably stop the epidemic in its tracks within days. Sounds wonderful, right?

The downside is, of course, that this would give legitimacy to a terrifying new surveillance system. If you know, for example, that I clicked on a Fox News link rather than a CNN link, that can teach you something about my political views and perhaps even my personality. But if you can monitor what happens to my body temperature, blood pressure and heart-rate as I watch the video clip, you can learn what makes me laugh, what makes me cry, and what makes me really, really angry.

It is crucial to remember that anger, joy, boredom and love are biological phenomena just like fever and a cough. The same technology that identifies coughs could also identify laughs. If corporations and governments start harvesting our biometric data en masse, they can get to know us far better than we know ourselves, and they can then not just predict our feelings but also manipulate our feelings and sell us anything they want — be it a product or a politician. Biometric monitoring would make Cambridge Analytica’s data hacking tactics look like something from the Stone Age. Imagine North Korea in 2030, when every citizen has to wear a biometric bracelet 24 hours a day. If you listen to a speech by the Great Leader and the bracelet picks up the tell-tale signs of anger, you are done for.

You could, of course, make the case for biometric surveillance as a temporary measure taken during a state of emergency. It would go away once the emergency is over. But temporary measures have a nasty habit of outlasting emergencies, especially as there is always a new emergency lurking on the horizon. My home country of Israel, for example, declared a state of emergency during its 1948 War of Independence, which justified a range of temporary measures from press censorship and land confiscation to special regulations for making pudding (I kid you not). The War of Independence has long been won, but Israel never declared the emergency over, and has failed to abolish many of the “temporary” measures of 1948 (the emergency pudding decree was mercifully abolished in 2011).

Even when infections from coronavirus are down to zero, some data-hungry governments could argue they needed to keep the biometric surveillance systems in place because they fear a second wave of coronavirus, or because there is a new Ebola strain evolving in central Africa, or because . . . you get the idea. A big battle has been raging in recent years over our privacy. The coronavirus crisis could be the battle’s tipping point. For when people are given a choice between privacy and health, they will usually choose health.
The soap police: show
Asking people to choose between privacy and health is, in fact, the very root of the problem. Because this is a false choice. We can and should enjoy both privacy and health. We can choose to protect our health and stop the coronavirus epidemic not by instituting totalitarian surveillance regimes, but rather by empowering citizens. In recent weeks, some of the most successful efforts to contain the coronavirus epidemic were orchestrated by South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore. While these countries have made some use of tracking applications, they have relied far more on extensive testing, on honest reporting, and on the willing co-operation of a well-informed public.

Centralised monitoring and harsh punishments aren’t the only way to make people comply with beneficial guidelines. When people are told the scientific facts, and when people trust public authorities to tell them these facts, citizens can do the right thing even without a Big Brother watching over their shoulders. A self-motivated and well-informed population is usually far more powerful and effective than a policed, ignorant population.

Consider, for example, washing your hands with soap. This has been one of the greatest advances ever in human hygiene. This simple action saves millions of lives every year. While we take it for granted, it was only in the 19th century that scientists discovered the importance of washing hands with soap. Previously, even doctors and nurses proceeded from one surgical operation to the next without washing their hands. Today billions of people daily wash their hands, not because they are afraid of the soap police, but rather because they understand the facts. I wash my hands with soap because I have heard of viruses and bacteria, I understand that these tiny organisms cause diseases, and I know that soap can remove them.

But to achieve such a level of compliance and co-operation, you need trust. People need to trust science, to trust public authorities, and to trust the media. Over the past few years, irresponsible politicians have deliberately undermined trust in science, in public authorities and in the media. Now these same irresponsible politicians might be tempted to take the high road to authoritarianism, arguing that you just cannot trust the public to do the right thing.

Normally, trust that has been eroded for years cannot be rebuilt overnight. But these are not normal times. In a moment of crisis, minds too can change quickly. You can have bitter arguments with your siblings for years, but when some emergency occurs, you suddenly discover a hidden reservoir of trust and amity, and you rush to help one another. Instead of building a surveillance regime, it is not too late to rebuild people’s trust in science, in public authorities and in the media. We should definitely make use of new technologies too, but these technologies should empower citizens. I am all in favour of monitoring my body temperature and blood pressure, but that data should not be used to create an all-powerful government. Rather, that data should enable me to make more informed personal choices, and also to hold government accountable for its decisions.

If I could track my own medical condition 24 hours a day, I would learn not only whether I have become a health hazard to other people, but also which habits contribute to my health. And if I could access and analyse reliable statistics on the spread of coronavirus, I would be able to judge whether the government is telling me the truth and whether it is adopting the right policies to combat the epidemic. Whenever people talk about surveillance, remember that the same surveillance technology can usually be used not only by governments to monitor individuals — but also by individuals to monitor governments.

The coronavirus epidemic is thus a major test of citizenship. In the days ahead, each one of us should choose to trust scientific data and healthcare experts over unfounded conspiracy theories and self-serving politicians. If we fail to make the right choice, we might find ourselves signing away our most precious freedoms, thinking that this is the only way to safeguard our health.
----
  • "In the days ahead, each one of us should choose to trust scientific data and healthcare experts over unfounded conspiracy theories and self-serving politicians"
----
We need a global plan: show
The second important choice we confront is between nationalist isolation and global solidarity. Both the epidemic itself and the resulting economic crisis are global problems. They can be solved effectively only by global co-operation.

First and foremost, in order to defeat the virus we need to share information globally. That’s the big advantage of humans over viruses. A coronavirus in China and a coronavirus in the US cannot swap tips about how to infect humans. But China can teach the US many valuable lessons about coronavirus and how to deal with it. What an Italian doctor discovers in Milan in the early morning might well save lives in Tehran by evening. When the UK government hesitates between several policies, it can get advice from the Koreans who have already faced a similar dilemma a month ago. But for this to happen, we need a spirit of global co-operation and trust.

Countries should be willing to share information openly and humbly seek advice, and should be able to trust the data and the insights they receive. We also need a global effort to produce and distribute medical equipment, most notably testing kits and respiratory machines. Instead of every country trying to do it locally and hoarding whatever equipment it can get, a co-ordinated global effort could greatly accelerate production and make sure life-saving equipment is distributed more fairly. Just as countries nationalise key industries during a war, the human war against coronavirus may require us to “humanise” the crucial production lines. A rich country with few coronavirus cases should be willing to send precious equipment to a poorer country with many cases, trusting that if and when it subsequently needs help, other countries will come to its assistance.

We might consider a similar global effort to pool medical personnel. Countries currently less affected could send medical staff to the worst-hit regions of the world, both in order to help them in their hour of need, and in order to gain valuable experience. If later on the focus of the epidemic shifts, help could start flowing in the opposite direction.

Global co-operation is vitally needed on the economic front too. Given the global nature of the economy and of supply chains, if each government does its own thing in complete disregard of the others, the result will be chaos and a deepening crisis. We need a global plan of action, and we need it fast.

Another requirement is reaching a global agreement on travel. Suspending all international travel for months will cause tremendous hardships, and hamper the war against coronavirus. Countries need to co-operate in order to allow at least a trickle of essential travellers to continue crossing borders: scientists, doctors, journalists, politicians, businesspeople. This can be done by reaching a global agreement on the pre-screening of travellers by their home country. If you know that only carefully screened travellers were allowed on a plane, you would be more willing to accept them into your country.

Unfortunately, at present countries hardly do any of these things. A collective paralysis has gripped the international community. There seem to be no adults in the room. One would have expected to see already weeks ago an emergency meeting of global leaders to come up with a common plan of action. The G7 leaders managed to organise a videoconference only this week, and it did not result in any such plan.

In previous global crises — such as the 2008 financial crisis and the 2014 Ebola epidemic — the US assumed the role of global leader. But the current US administration has abdicated the job of leader. It has made it very clear that it cares about the greatness of America far more than about the future of humanity.

This administration has abandoned even its closest allies. When it banned all travel from the EU, it didn’t bother to give the EU so much as an advance notice — let alone consult with the EU about that drastic measure. It has scandalised Germany by allegedly offering $1bn to a German pharmaceutical company to buy monopoly rights to a new Covid-19 vaccine. Even if the current administration eventually changes tack and comes up with a global plan of action, few would follow a leader who never takes responsibility, who never admits mistakes, and who routinely takes all the credit for himself while leaving all the blame to others.

If the void left by the US isn’t filled by other countries, not only will it be much harder to stop the current epidemic, but its legacy will continue to poison international relations for years to come. Yet every crisis is also an opportunity. We must hope that the current epidemic will help humankind realise the acute danger posed by global disunity.

Humanity needs to make a choice. Will we travel down the route of disunity, or will we adopt the path of global solidarity? If we choose disunity, this will not only prolong the crisis, but will probably result in even worse catastrophes in the future. If we choose global solidarity, it will be a victory not only against the coronavirus, but against all future epidemics and crises that might assail humankind in the 21st century.
Yuval Noah Harari is author of ‘Sapiens’, ‘Homo Deus’ and ‘21 Lessons for the 21st Century’
User avatar
sorCrer
Posts: 12309
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by sorCrer »

sewa wrote:
Bindi wrote:
6.Jones wrote: Will it then appear in many journals?
Twice as many journals every three days.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
:lol: :thumbup:
User avatar
Kiwias
Posts: 41473
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Kiwias »

kiap

Thanks and we now know you subscribe to FT.

1:18 here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGscoaUWW2M
User avatar
clementinfrance
Posts: 3607
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: France

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by clementinfrance »

kiap wrote:Naughty of me, and it's a very long article. I have wrapped the sections in spoilers ...

Yuval Noah Harari: the world after coronavirus

This storm will pass. But the choices we make now could change our lives for years to come

Yuval Noah Harari 8 hours ago

Humankind is now facing a global crisis. Perhaps the biggest crisis of our generation. The decisions people and governments take in the next few weeks will probably shape the world for years to come. They will shape not just our healthcare systems but also our economy, politics and culture. We must act quickly and decisively. We should also take into account the long-term consequences of our actions. When choosing between alternatives, we should ask ourselves not only how to overcome the immediate threat, but also what kind of world we will inhabit once the storm passes. Yes, the storm will pass, humankind will survive, most of us will still be alive — but we will inhabit a different world.

Many short-term emergency measures will become a fixture of life. That is the nature of emergencies. They fast-forward historical processes. Decisions that in normal times could take years of deliberation are passed in a matter of hours. Immature and even dangerous technologies are pressed into service, because the risks of doing nothing are bigger. Entire countries serve as guinea-pigs in large-scale social experiments. What happens when everybody works from home and communicates only at a distance? What happens when entire schools and universities go online? In normal times, governments, businesses and educational boards would never agree to conduct such experiments. But these aren’t normal times.

In this time of crisis, we face two particularly important choices. The first is between totalitarian surveillance and citizen empowerment. The second is between nationalist isolation and global solidarity.
----
  • About the photography: The images accompanying this article are taken from webcams overlooking the deserted streets of Italy, found and manipulated by Graziano Panfili, a photographer living under lockdown
-----
Under-the-skin surveillance: show
In order to stop the epidemic, entire populations need to comply with certain guidelines. There are two main ways of achieving this. One method is for the government to monitor people, and punish those who break the rules. Today, for the first time in human history, technology makes it possible to monitor everyone all the time. Fifty years ago, the KGB couldn’t follow 240m Soviet citizens 24 hours a day, nor could the KGB hope to effectively process all the information gathered. The KGB relied on human agents and analysts, and it just couldn’t place a human agent to follow every citizen. But now governments can rely on ubiquitous sensors and powerful algorithms instead of flesh-and-blood spooks.

In their battle against the coronavirus epidemic several governments have already deployed the new surveillance tools. The most notable case is China. By closely monitoring people’s smartphones, making use of hundreds of millions of face-recognising cameras, and obliging people to check and report their body temperature and medical condition, the Chinese authorities can not only quickly identify suspected coronavirus carriers, but also track their movements and identify anyone they came into contact with. A range of mobile apps warn citizens about their proximity to infected patients.

This kind of technology is not limited to east Asia. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel recently authorised the Israel Security Agency to deploy surveillance technology normally reserved for battling terrorists to track coronavirus patients. When the relevant parliamentary subcommittee refused to authorise the measure, Netanyahu rammed it through with an “emergency decree”.

You might argue that there is nothing new about all this. In recent years both governments and corporations have been using ever more sophisticated technologies to track, monitor and manipulate people. Yet if we are not careful, the epidemic might nevertheless mark an important watershed in the history of surveillance. Not only because it might normalise the deployment of mass surveillance tools in countries that have so far rejected them, but even more so because it signifies a dramatic transition from “over the skin” to “under the skin” surveillance.

Hitherto, when your finger touched the screen of your smartphone and clicked on a link, the government wanted to know what exactly your finger was clicking on. But with coronavirus, the focus of interest shifts. Now the government wants to know the temperature of your finger and the blood-pressure under its skin.
The emergency pudding: show
One of the problems we face in working out where we stand on surveillance is that none of us know exactly how we are being surveilled, and what the coming years might bring. Surveillance technology is developing at breakneck speed, and what seemed science-fiction 10 years ago is today old news. As a thought experiment, consider a hypothetical government that demands that every citizen wears a biometric bracelet that monitors body temperature and heart-rate 24 hours a day. The resulting data is hoarded and analysed by government algorithms. The algorithms will know that you are sick even before you know it, and they will also know where you have been, and who you have met. The chains of infection could be drastically shortened, and even cut altogether. Such a system could arguably stop the epidemic in its tracks within days. Sounds wonderful, right?

The downside is, of course, that this would give legitimacy to a terrifying new surveillance system. If you know, for example, that I clicked on a Fox News link rather than a CNN link, that can teach you something about my political views and perhaps even my personality. But if you can monitor what happens to my body temperature, blood pressure and heart-rate as I watch the video clip, you can learn what makes me laugh, what makes me cry, and what makes me really, really angry.

It is crucial to remember that anger, joy, boredom and love are biological phenomena just like fever and a cough. The same technology that identifies coughs could also identify laughs. If corporations and governments start harvesting our biometric data en masse, they can get to know us far better than we know ourselves, and they can then not just predict our feelings but also manipulate our feelings and sell us anything they want — be it a product or a politician. Biometric monitoring would make Cambridge Analytica’s data hacking tactics look like something from the Stone Age. Imagine North Korea in 2030, when every citizen has to wear a biometric bracelet 24 hours a day. If you listen to a speech by the Great Leader and the bracelet picks up the tell-tale signs of anger, you are done for.

You could, of course, make the case for biometric surveillance as a temporary measure taken during a state of emergency. It would go away once the emergency is over. But temporary measures have a nasty habit of outlasting emergencies, especially as there is always a new emergency lurking on the horizon. My home country of Israel, for example, declared a state of emergency during its 1948 War of Independence, which justified a range of temporary measures from press censorship and land confiscation to special regulations for making pudding (I kid you not). The War of Independence has long been won, but Israel never declared the emergency over, and has failed to abolish many of the “temporary” measures of 1948 (the emergency pudding decree was mercifully abolished in 2011).

Even when infections from coronavirus are down to zero, some data-hungry governments could argue they needed to keep the biometric surveillance systems in place because they fear a second wave of coronavirus, or because there is a new Ebola strain evolving in central Africa, or because . . . you get the idea. A big battle has been raging in recent years over our privacy. The coronavirus crisis could be the battle’s tipping point. For when people are given a choice between privacy and health, they will usually choose health.
The soap police: show
Asking people to choose between privacy and health is, in fact, the very root of the problem. Because this is a false choice. We can and should enjoy both privacy and health. We can choose to protect our health and stop the coronavirus epidemic not by instituting totalitarian surveillance regimes, but rather by empowering citizens. In recent weeks, some of the most successful efforts to contain the coronavirus epidemic were orchestrated by South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore. While these countries have made some use of tracking applications, they have relied far more on extensive testing, on honest reporting, and on the willing co-operation of a well-informed public.

Centralised monitoring and harsh punishments aren’t the only way to make people comply with beneficial guidelines. When people are told the scientific facts, and when people trust public authorities to tell them these facts, citizens can do the right thing even without a Big Brother watching over their shoulders. A self-motivated and well-informed population is usually far more powerful and effective than a policed, ignorant population.

Consider, for example, washing your hands with soap. This has been one of the greatest advances ever in human hygiene. This simple action saves millions of lives every year. While we take it for granted, it was only in the 19th century that scientists discovered the importance of washing hands with soap. Previously, even doctors and nurses proceeded from one surgical operation to the next without washing their hands. Today billions of people daily wash their hands, not because they are afraid of the soap police, but rather because they understand the facts. I wash my hands with soap because I have heard of viruses and bacteria, I understand that these tiny organisms cause diseases, and I know that soap can remove them.

But to achieve such a level of compliance and co-operation, you need trust. People need to trust science, to trust public authorities, and to trust the media. Over the past few years, irresponsible politicians have deliberately undermined trust in science, in public authorities and in the media. Now these same irresponsible politicians might be tempted to take the high road to authoritarianism, arguing that you just cannot trust the public to do the right thing.

Normally, trust that has been eroded for years cannot be rebuilt overnight. But these are not normal times. In a moment of crisis, minds too can change quickly. You can have bitter arguments with your siblings for years, but when some emergency occurs, you suddenly discover a hidden reservoir of trust and amity, and you rush to help one another. Instead of building a surveillance regime, it is not too late to rebuild people’s trust in science, in public authorities and in the media. We should definitely make use of new technologies too, but these technologies should empower citizens. I am all in favour of monitoring my body temperature and blood pressure, but that data should not be used to create an all-powerful government. Rather, that data should enable me to make more informed personal choices, and also to hold government accountable for its decisions.

If I could track my own medical condition 24 hours a day, I would learn not only whether I have become a health hazard to other people, but also which habits contribute to my health. And if I could access and analyse reliable statistics on the spread of coronavirus, I would be able to judge whether the government is telling me the truth and whether it is adopting the right policies to combat the epidemic. Whenever people talk about surveillance, remember that the same surveillance technology can usually be used not only by governments to monitor individuals — but also by individuals to monitor governments.

The coronavirus epidemic is thus a major test of citizenship. In the days ahead, each one of us should choose to trust scientific data and healthcare experts over unfounded conspiracy theories and self-serving politicians. If we fail to make the right choice, we might find ourselves signing away our most precious freedoms, thinking that this is the only way to safeguard our health.
----
  • "In the days ahead, each one of us should choose to trust scientific data and healthcare experts over unfounded conspiracy theories and self-serving politicians"
----
We need a global plan: show
The second important choice we confront is between nationalist isolation and global solidarity. Both the epidemic itself and the resulting economic crisis are global problems. They can be solved effectively only by global co-operation.

First and foremost, in order to defeat the virus we need to share information globally. That’s the big advantage of humans over viruses. A coronavirus in China and a coronavirus in the US cannot swap tips about how to infect humans. But China can teach the US many valuable lessons about coronavirus and how to deal with it. What an Italian doctor discovers in Milan in the early morning might well save lives in Tehran by evening. When the UK government hesitates between several policies, it can get advice from the Koreans who have already faced a similar dilemma a month ago. But for this to happen, we need a spirit of global co-operation and trust.

Countries should be willing to share information openly and humbly seek advice, and should be able to trust the data and the insights they receive. We also need a global effort to produce and distribute medical equipment, most notably testing kits and respiratory machines. Instead of every country trying to do it locally and hoarding whatever equipment it can get, a co-ordinated global effort could greatly accelerate production and make sure life-saving equipment is distributed more fairly. Just as countries nationalise key industries during a war, the human war against coronavirus may require us to “humanise” the crucial production lines. A rich country with few coronavirus cases should be willing to send precious equipment to a poorer country with many cases, trusting that if and when it subsequently needs help, other countries will come to its assistance.

We might consider a similar global effort to pool medical personnel. Countries currently less affected could send medical staff to the worst-hit regions of the world, both in order to help them in their hour of need, and in order to gain valuable experience. If later on the focus of the epidemic shifts, help could start flowing in the opposite direction.

Global co-operation is vitally needed on the economic front too. Given the global nature of the economy and of supply chains, if each government does its own thing in complete disregard of the others, the result will be chaos and a deepening crisis. We need a global plan of action, and we need it fast.

Another requirement is reaching a global agreement on travel. Suspending all international travel for months will cause tremendous hardships, and hamper the war against coronavirus. Countries need to co-operate in order to allow at least a trickle of essential travellers to continue crossing borders: scientists, doctors, journalists, politicians, businesspeople. This can be done by reaching a global agreement on the pre-screening of travellers by their home country. If you know that only carefully screened travellers were allowed on a plane, you would be more willing to accept them into your country.

Unfortunately, at present countries hardly do any of these things. A collective paralysis has gripped the international community. There seem to be no adults in the room. One would have expected to see already weeks ago an emergency meeting of global leaders to come up with a common plan of action. The G7 leaders managed to organise a videoconference only this week, and it did not result in any such plan.

In previous global crises — such as the 2008 financial crisis and the 2014 Ebola epidemic — the US assumed the role of global leader. But the current US administration has abdicated the job of leader. It has made it very clear that it cares about the greatness of America far more than about the future of humanity.

This administration has abandoned even its closest allies. When it banned all travel from the EU, it didn’t bother to give the EU so much as an advance notice — let alone consult with the EU about that drastic measure. It has scandalised Germany by allegedly offering $1bn to a German pharmaceutical company to buy monopoly rights to a new Covid-19 vaccine. Even if the current administration eventually changes tack and comes up with a global plan of action, few would follow a leader who never takes responsibility, who never admits mistakes, and who routinely takes all the credit for himself while leaving all the blame to others.

If the void left by the US isn’t filled by other countries, not only will it be much harder to stop the current epidemic, but its legacy will continue to poison international relations for years to come. Yet every crisis is also an opportunity. We must hope that the current epidemic will help humankind realise the acute danger posed by global disunity.

Humanity needs to make a choice. Will we travel down the route of disunity, or will we adopt the path of global solidarity? If we choose disunity, this will not only prolong the crisis, but will probably result in even worse catastrophes in the future. If we choose global solidarity, it will be a victory not only against the coronavirus, but against all future epidemics and crises that might assail humankind in the 21st century.
Yuval Noah Harari is author of ‘Sapiens’, ‘Homo Deus’ and ‘21 Lessons for the 21st Century’
:thumbup:

Agree with pretty much all of that, especially the section about global solidarity and co-operation.
User avatar
jdogscoop
Posts: 13737
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Melbourne

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by jdogscoop »

de_Selby wrote:I'm a fan of the Joe Rogan podcast, which I think gives me a unique skillset to be able to asses when everyone else on this thread is talking shite.
I was dating a girl who said she was in a journal. I never did listen that closely to her.

My blood runs cold
My memory has just been sold
My angel is the centerfold
Angel is the centerfold
My blood runs cold
My memory has just been sold
Angel is the centerfold
Angel is the centrefold
User avatar
kiap
Posts: 20043
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by kiap »

Kiwias wrote:kiap

Thanks and we now know you subscribe to FT.

1:18 here
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGscoaUWW2M
Ha, I could try to B.S. that I "own the country" ;) but in reality I wuz just looking for big tits.

No, I just lucked in like yourself intially and got to see the page from a search. :thumbup:
User avatar
hermes-trismegistus
Posts: 3250
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by hermes-trismegistus »

clementinfrance wrote:
kiap wrote:Naughty of me, and it's a very long article. I have wrapped the sections in spoilers ...

Yuval Noah Harari: the world after coronavirus

This storm will pass. But the choices we make now could change our lives for years to come

Yuval Noah Harari 8 hours ago

Humankind is now facing a global crisis. Perhaps the biggest crisis of our generation. The decisions people and governments take in the next few weeks will probably shape the world for years to come. They will shape not just our healthcare systems but also our economy, politics and culture. We must act quickly and decisively. We should also take into account the long-term consequences of our actions. When choosing between alternatives, we should ask ourselves not only how to overcome the immediate threat, but also what kind of world we will inhabit once the storm passes. Yes, the storm will pass, humankind will survive, most of us will still be alive — but we will inhabit a different world.

Many short-term emergency measures will become a fixture of life. That is the nature of emergencies. They fast-forward historical processes. Decisions that in normal times could take years of deliberation are passed in a matter of hours. Immature and even dangerous technologies are pressed into service, because the risks of doing nothing are bigger. Entire countries serve as guinea-pigs in large-scale social experiments. What happens when everybody works from home and communicates only at a distance? What happens when entire schools and universities go online? In normal times, governments, businesses and educational boards would never agree to conduct such experiments. But these aren’t normal times.

In this time of crisis, we face two particularly important choices. The first is between totalitarian surveillance and citizen empowerment. The second is between nationalist isolation and global solidarity.
----
  • About the photography: The images accompanying this article are taken from webcams overlooking the deserted streets of Italy, found and manipulated by Graziano Panfili, a photographer living under lockdown
-----
Under-the-skin surveillance: show
In order to stop the epidemic, entire populations need to comply with certain guidelines. There are two main ways of achieving this. One method is for the government to monitor people, and punish those who break the rules. Today, for the first time in human history, technology makes it possible to monitor everyone all the time. Fifty years ago, the KGB couldn’t follow 240m Soviet citizens 24 hours a day, nor could the KGB hope to effectively process all the information gathered. The KGB relied on human agents and analysts, and it just couldn’t place a human agent to follow every citizen. But now governments can rely on ubiquitous sensors and powerful algorithms instead of flesh-and-blood spooks.

In their battle against the coronavirus epidemic several governments have already deployed the new surveillance tools. The most notable case is China. By closely monitoring people’s smartphones, making use of hundreds of millions of face-recognising cameras, and obliging people to check and report their body temperature and medical condition, the Chinese authorities can not only quickly identify suspected coronavirus carriers, but also track their movements and identify anyone they came into contact with. A range of mobile apps warn citizens about their proximity to infected patients.

This kind of technology is not limited to east Asia. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel recently authorised the Israel Security Agency to deploy surveillance technology normally reserved for battling terrorists to track coronavirus patients. When the relevant parliamentary subcommittee refused to authorise the measure, Netanyahu rammed it through with an “emergency decree”.

You might argue that there is nothing new about all this. In recent years both governments and corporations have been using ever more sophisticated technologies to track, monitor and manipulate people. Yet if we are not careful, the epidemic might nevertheless mark an important watershed in the history of surveillance. Not only because it might normalise the deployment of mass surveillance tools in countries that have so far rejected them, but even more so because it signifies a dramatic transition from “over the skin” to “under the skin” surveillance.

Hitherto, when your finger touched the screen of your smartphone and clicked on a link, the government wanted to know what exactly your finger was clicking on. But with coronavirus, the focus of interest shifts. Now the government wants to know the temperature of your finger and the blood-pressure under its skin.
The emergency pudding: show
One of the problems we face in working out where we stand on surveillance is that none of us know exactly how we are being surveilled, and what the coming years might bring. Surveillance technology is developing at breakneck speed, and what seemed science-fiction 10 years ago is today old news. As a thought experiment, consider a hypothetical government that demands that every citizen wears a biometric bracelet that monitors body temperature and heart-rate 24 hours a day. The resulting data is hoarded and analysed by government algorithms. The algorithms will know that you are sick even before you know it, and they will also know where you have been, and who you have met. The chains of infection could be drastically shortened, and even cut altogether. Such a system could arguably stop the epidemic in its tracks within days. Sounds wonderful, right?

The downside is, of course, that this would give legitimacy to a terrifying new surveillance system. If you know, for example, that I clicked on a Fox News link rather than a CNN link, that can teach you something about my political views and perhaps even my personality. But if you can monitor what happens to my body temperature, blood pressure and heart-rate as I watch the video clip, you can learn what makes me laugh, what makes me cry, and what makes me really, really angry.

It is crucial to remember that anger, joy, boredom and love are biological phenomena just like fever and a cough. The same technology that identifies coughs could also identify laughs. If corporations and governments start harvesting our biometric data en masse, they can get to know us far better than we know ourselves, and they can then not just predict our feelings but also manipulate our feelings and sell us anything they want — be it a product or a politician. Biometric monitoring would make Cambridge Analytica’s data hacking tactics look like something from the Stone Age. Imagine North Korea in 2030, when every citizen has to wear a biometric bracelet 24 hours a day. If you listen to a speech by the Great Leader and the bracelet picks up the tell-tale signs of anger, you are done for.

You could, of course, make the case for biometric surveillance as a temporary measure taken during a state of emergency. It would go away once the emergency is over. But temporary measures have a nasty habit of outlasting emergencies, especially as there is always a new emergency lurking on the horizon. My home country of Israel, for example, declared a state of emergency during its 1948 War of Independence, which justified a range of temporary measures from press censorship and land confiscation to special regulations for making pudding (I kid you not). The War of Independence has long been won, but Israel never declared the emergency over, and has failed to abolish many of the “temporary” measures of 1948 (the emergency pudding decree was mercifully abolished in 2011).

Even when infections from coronavirus are down to zero, some data-hungry governments could argue they needed to keep the biometric surveillance systems in place because they fear a second wave of coronavirus, or because there is a new Ebola strain evolving in central Africa, or because . . . you get the idea. A big battle has been raging in recent years over our privacy. The coronavirus crisis could be the battle’s tipping point. For when people are given a choice between privacy and health, they will usually choose health.
The soap police: show
Asking people to choose between privacy and health is, in fact, the very root of the problem. Because this is a false choice. We can and should enjoy both privacy and health. We can choose to protect our health and stop the coronavirus epidemic not by instituting totalitarian surveillance regimes, but rather by empowering citizens. In recent weeks, some of the most successful efforts to contain the coronavirus epidemic were orchestrated by South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore. While these countries have made some use of tracking applications, they have relied far more on extensive testing, on honest reporting, and on the willing co-operation of a well-informed public.

Centralised monitoring and harsh punishments aren’t the only way to make people comply with beneficial guidelines. When people are told the scientific facts, and when people trust public authorities to tell them these facts, citizens can do the right thing even without a Big Brother watching over their shoulders. A self-motivated and well-informed population is usually far more powerful and effective than a policed, ignorant population.

Consider, for example, washing your hands with soap. This has been one of the greatest advances ever in human hygiene. This simple action saves millions of lives every year. While we take it for granted, it was only in the 19th century that scientists discovered the importance of washing hands with soap. Previously, even doctors and nurses proceeded from one surgical operation to the next without washing their hands. Today billions of people daily wash their hands, not because they are afraid of the soap police, but rather because they understand the facts. I wash my hands with soap because I have heard of viruses and bacteria, I understand that these tiny organisms cause diseases, and I know that soap can remove them.

But to achieve such a level of compliance and co-operation, you need trust. People need to trust science, to trust public authorities, and to trust the media. Over the past few years, irresponsible politicians have deliberately undermined trust in science, in public authorities and in the media. Now these same irresponsible politicians might be tempted to take the high road to authoritarianism, arguing that you just cannot trust the public to do the right thing.

Normally, trust that has been eroded for years cannot be rebuilt overnight. But these are not normal times. In a moment of crisis, minds too can change quickly. You can have bitter arguments with your siblings for years, but when some emergency occurs, you suddenly discover a hidden reservoir of trust and amity, and you rush to help one another. Instead of building a surveillance regime, it is not too late to rebuild people’s trust in science, in public authorities and in the media. We should definitely make use of new technologies too, but these technologies should empower citizens. I am all in favour of monitoring my body temperature and blood pressure, but that data should not be used to create an all-powerful government. Rather, that data should enable me to make more informed personal choices, and also to hold government accountable for its decisions.

If I could track my own medical condition 24 hours a day, I would learn not only whether I have become a health hazard to other people, but also which habits contribute to my health. And if I could access and analyse reliable statistics on the spread of coronavirus, I would be able to judge whether the government is telling me the truth and whether it is adopting the right policies to combat the epidemic. Whenever people talk about surveillance, remember that the same surveillance technology can usually be used not only by governments to monitor individuals — but also by individuals to monitor governments.

The coronavirus epidemic is thus a major test of citizenship. In the days ahead, each one of us should choose to trust scientific data and healthcare experts over unfounded conspiracy theories and self-serving politicians. If we fail to make the right choice, we might find ourselves signing away our most precious freedoms, thinking that this is the only way to safeguard our health.
----
  • "In the days ahead, each one of us should choose to trust scientific data and healthcare experts over unfounded conspiracy theories and self-serving politicians"
----
We need a global plan: show
The second important choice we confront is between nationalist isolation and global solidarity. Both the epidemic itself and the resulting economic crisis are global problems. They can be solved effectively only by global co-operation.

First and foremost, in order to defeat the virus we need to share information globally. That’s the big advantage of humans over viruses. A coronavirus in China and a coronavirus in the US cannot swap tips about how to infect humans. But China can teach the US many valuable lessons about coronavirus and how to deal with it. What an Italian doctor discovers in Milan in the early morning might well save lives in Tehran by evening. When the UK government hesitates between several policies, it can get advice from the Koreans who have already faced a similar dilemma a month ago. But for this to happen, we need a spirit of global co-operation and trust.

Countries should be willing to share information openly and humbly seek advice, and should be able to trust the data and the insights they receive. We also need a global effort to produce and distribute medical equipment, most notably testing kits and respiratory machines. Instead of every country trying to do it locally and hoarding whatever equipment it can get, a co-ordinated global effort could greatly accelerate production and make sure life-saving equipment is distributed more fairly. Just as countries nationalise key industries during a war, the human war against coronavirus may require us to “humanise” the crucial production lines. A rich country with few coronavirus cases should be willing to send precious equipment to a poorer country with many cases, trusting that if and when it subsequently needs help, other countries will come to its assistance.

We might consider a similar global effort to pool medical personnel. Countries currently less affected could send medical staff to the worst-hit regions of the world, both in order to help them in their hour of need, and in order to gain valuable experience. If later on the focus of the epidemic shifts, help could start flowing in the opposite direction.

Global co-operation is vitally needed on the economic front too. Given the global nature of the economy and of supply chains, if each government does its own thing in complete disregard of the others, the result will be chaos and a deepening crisis. We need a global plan of action, and we need it fast.

Another requirement is reaching a global agreement on travel. Suspending all international travel for months will cause tremendous hardships, and hamper the war against coronavirus. Countries need to co-operate in order to allow at least a trickle of essential travellers to continue crossing borders: scientists, doctors, journalists, politicians, businesspeople. This can be done by reaching a global agreement on the pre-screening of travellers by their home country. If you know that only carefully screened travellers were allowed on a plane, you would be more willing to accept them into your country.

Unfortunately, at present countries hardly do any of these things. A collective paralysis has gripped the international community. There seem to be no adults in the room. One would have expected to see already weeks ago an emergency meeting of global leaders to come up with a common plan of action. The G7 leaders managed to organise a videoconference only this week, and it did not result in any such plan.

In previous global crises — such as the 2008 financial crisis and the 2014 Ebola epidemic — the US assumed the role of global leader. But the current US administration has abdicated the job of leader. It has made it very clear that it cares about the greatness of America far more than about the future of humanity.

This administration has abandoned even its closest allies. When it banned all travel from the EU, it didn’t bother to give the EU so much as an advance notice — let alone consult with the EU about that drastic measure. It has scandalised Germany by allegedly offering $1bn to a German pharmaceutical company to buy monopoly rights to a new Covid-19 vaccine. Even if the current administration eventually changes tack and comes up with a global plan of action, few would follow a leader who never takes responsibility, who never admits mistakes, and who routinely takes all the credit for himself while leaving all the blame to others.

If the void left by the US isn’t filled by other countries, not only will it be much harder to stop the current epidemic, but its legacy will continue to poison international relations for years to come. Yet every crisis is also an opportunity. We must hope that the current epidemic will help humankind realise the acute danger posed by global disunity.

Humanity needs to make a choice. Will we travel down the route of disunity, or will we adopt the path of global solidarity? If we choose disunity, this will not only prolong the crisis, but will probably result in even worse catastrophes in the future. If we choose global solidarity, it will be a victory not only against the coronavirus, but against all future epidemics and crises that might assail humankind in the 21st century.
Yuval Noah Harari is author of ‘Sapiens’, ‘Homo Deus’ and ‘21 Lessons for the 21st Century’
:thumbup:

Agree with pretty much all of that, especially the section about global solidarity and co-operation.
Sorry. Edit. Not Ditto.

Think benevolent global organisations are a pipedream. The further down the line they get, the more ossified, rigid, and self serving they become.
de_Selby
Posts: 3792
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2014 5:47 pm

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by de_Selby »

6.Jones wrote:
de_Selby wrote:I'm a fan of the Joe Rogan podcast, which I think gives me a unique skillset to be able to asses when everyone else on this thread is talking shite.
Russell's Set Paradox.
Just so you don't think this was completely wasted, I looked it up and loled when I got it.
User avatar
Sandstorm
Posts: 28599
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 11:05 am
Location: Chickenrunning...

Re: Coronavirus Thread. Virus v humans

Post by Sandstorm »

Mog The Almighty wrote:I asked advice from my father recently - a retired surgeon of over 45 years experience-- and his response was that he's not qualified to comment because it's not his field, but just take one day at a time.
He sounds like a smart, thoughtful, reasonable person. Do you take after your Mum?
Post Reply