6 ms·

I'm at a small ~500 attendee conference today and I'd say only about 2/3 of everyone bothered to show up. We're here in NYC where we just had our first covid19

I'm at a small ~500 attendee conference today and I'd say only about 2/3 of everyone bothered to show up. We're here in NYC where we just had our first covid19 cases. People are scared.

ohmanjjj 7y ago
Going to Channel Partners in Vegas next week. Usually about 7000 attendees. Will be interesting
Zenst 7y ago
Given we now have a media/news system that perpetuates such social drama and literally spread fear, then we often see fear itself do way more damage than the crux of the story itself. Imagine if we had a news/media blackout for a month - life would be so much better overall that you appreciate why so many just avoid social media, a label that is so far removed from the social aspect that it is literally fear/hate media platforms for the extremes in life, whatever side of the fence they sit.
- nonbirithm 7y ago
  Nice as it would be to have such a blackout the media companies would complain to no end about lost profits. The incentives are totally misaligned. In my opinion, Fox and the AP are not really comparable in terms of quality. The former is for-profit, the latter is non-profit. "If it bleeds, it leads" is less viable when people rely on you writing the more undistilled version of a story to sell to others who put their own spin on it later. That's not to say there's no bias at all in such journalism, but I feel like the incentives greatly affect the content of the story. If people panicking leads to people watching more news, the news companies will let it happen. Besides, these people have to put food in the table somehow. Asking them to just stop working because their work is ethically compromised would raise various issues.
tilolebo 7y ago
It is fear or common sense that actually make people avoid big gatherings during the pandemic of an unknown virus? It might actually just be public-spiritedness.
- Thriptic 7y ago
  I think it's both. I was at PAX East over the weekend with a 100,000 strong cohort of people who aren't exactly well known for personal hygiene and I wasn't scared, but it probably wasn't the ideal place to go. As long as you take strong precautions (cleaning shared surfaces aggressively, using hand sanitizer or washing hands after touching shared surfaces or people, avoiding sick people, avoiding confined spaces, etc) then I don't think there is really that much risk short of being coughed on by someone, but not much risk != basically no risk if you don't go. I actually went with a friend who was sick with the common cold and I was more concerned about him getting me sick than me getting COVID-19, and it seems I managed to avoid both.
  - tilolebo 7y ago
    You'll only know for sure in two weeks. It leaves yoi plenty of time to infect other people in your community
  - volkl48 7y ago
    (I was also there, had a great time as usual). PAX East basically only happened IMO because it was already in motion by the time the COVID-19 concerns really blew up. Ironically, the early date that no one was happy with probably saved the convention. If it was being held even this week, much less in a few weeks like GDC was supposed to be, I'd expect widespread exhibitor cancellations and likely event cancellation.
  - johntash 7y ago
    > ... it seems I managed to avoid both. Unfortunately I don't think you'll know for sure if you got sick for at least a few more days. For COVID-19, I think there is a 5-7 day period where you can show no symptoms (but still pass it on to other people.) And even for the regular cold/flu, it can take a couple days for symptoms to show up. I agree with everything else you said though; wash your hands often, use hand sanitizer, bring lysol/clorox wipes with you and wipe down any shared surfaces if possible.
    - katbyte 7y ago
outside1234 7y ago
No - they are responsible. It is irresponsible to show up to these events when the mortality rate for 70+ year olds is so high for the virus. These events just exponentially multiply community transmission so while everyone there might be 30ish and just gets a bad flu, the bigger point is that they are spreading it to their communities at home and disproportionately at-risk populations.
- the_watcher 7y ago
  It's possible to be both scared and responsible.
- davidw 7y ago
  Also - and this is critical - the more it can be slowed down, the less likely it is that the health system gets overloaded, which would lead to more deaths than if the exact same quantity of people become sick over a more drawn out period of time.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

I'm at a small ~500 attendee conference today and I'd say only about 2/3 of everyone bothered to show up. We're here in NYC where we just had our first covid19 cases. People are scared.

ohmanjjj 7y ago

Going to Channel Partners in Vegas next week. Usually about 7000 attendees. Will be interesting

Zenst 7y ago

Given we now have a media/news system that perpetuates such social drama and literally spread fear, then we often see fear itself do way more damage than the crux of the story itself. Imagine if we had a news/media blackout for a month - life would be so much better overall that you appreciate why so many just avoid social media, a label that is so far removed from the social aspect that it is literally fear/hate media platforms for the extremes in life, whatever side of the fence they sit.

nonbirithm 7y ago
Nice as it would be to have such a blackout the media companies would complain to no end about lost profits. The incentives are totally misaligned. In my opinion, Fox and the AP are not really comparable in terms of quality. The former is for-profit, the latter is non-profit. "If it bleeds, it leads" is less viable when people rely on you writing the more undistilled version of a story to sell to others who put their own spin on it later. That's not to say there's no bias at all in such journalism, but I feel like the incentives greatly affect the content of the story. If people panicking leads to people watching more news, the news companies will let it happen. Besides, these people have to put food in the table somehow. Asking them to just stop working because their work is ethically compromised would raise various issues.

tilolebo 7y ago

It is fear or common sense that actually make people avoid big gatherings during the pandemic of an unknown virus? It might actually just be public-spiritedness.

Thriptic 7y ago
I think it's both. I was at PAX East over the weekend with a 100,000 strong cohort of people who aren't exactly well known for personal hygiene and I wasn't scared, but it probably wasn't the ideal place to go. As long as you take strong precautions (cleaning shared surfaces aggressively, using hand sanitizer or washing hands after touching shared surfaces or people, avoiding sick people, avoiding confined spaces, etc) then I don't think there is really that much risk short of being coughed on by someone, but not much risk != basically no risk if you don't go. I actually went with a friend who was sick with the common cold and I was more concerned about him getting me sick than me getting COVID-19, and it seems I managed to avoid both.
- tilolebo 7y ago
  You'll only know for sure in two weeks. It leaves yoi plenty of time to infect other people in your community
- volkl48 7y ago
  (I was also there, had a great time as usual). PAX East basically only happened IMO because it was already in motion by the time the COVID-19 concerns really blew up. Ironically, the early date that no one was happy with probably saved the convention. If it was being held even this week, much less in a few weeks like GDC was supposed to be, I'd expect widespread exhibitor cancellations and likely event cancellation.
- johntash 7y ago
  > ... it seems I managed to avoid both. Unfortunately I don't think you'll know for sure if you got sick for at least a few more days. For COVID-19, I think there is a 5-7 day period where you can show no symptoms (but still pass it on to other people.) And even for the regular cold/flu, it can take a couple days for symptoms to show up. I agree with everything else you said though; wash your hands often, use hand sanitizer, bring lysol/clorox wipes with you and wipe down any shared surfaces if possible.
  - katbyte 7y ago

outside1234 7y ago

No - they are responsible. It is irresponsible to show up to these events when the mortality rate for 70+ year olds is so high for the virus. These events just exponentially multiply community transmission so while everyone there might be 30ish and just gets a bad flu, the bigger point is that they are spreading it to their communities at home and disproportionately at-risk populations.

the_watcher 7y ago
It's possible to be both scared and responsible.
davidw 7y ago
Also - and this is critical - the more it can be slowed down, the less likely it is that the health system gets overloaded, which would lead to more deaths than if the exact same quantity of people become sick over a more drawn out period of time.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]