4 ms·
Your take on things is interesting as one instance of 3blue1brown's point in the video: if everyone is worrying, you don't have anything to worry about. But if
by killjoywashere 7y ago
Your take on things is interesting as one instance of 3blue1brown's point in the video: if everyone is worrying, you don't have anything to worry about. But if no one is worried, you should be worried.
You seem to be taking a position of "Everyone else is worried. I assert that my non-worry will be proven to be the correct position." Yet, your prediction that the redditors are excessively worried ("panicky") will only be borne out if those who worry are sufficient in number and intensity to keep downward pressure on the exponential multiplier.
There's a worry vector field around the Earth here, I can feel it. I wonder what you get with the line integral?
- haunter 7y agoI worry but I don't accept reddit's panicky "70% will be infected + 4% death rate = 150 million deaths" I even think the 500k death in the US is too much https://www.businessinsider.com/presentation-us-hospitals-preparing-for-millions-of-hospitalizations-2020-3 https://www.businessinsider.com/presentation-us-hospitals-pr... >Lawler's estimates include: >4.8 million hospitalizations associated with the novel coronavirus >96 million cases overall in the US >480,000 deaths Once again I'm not downplaying it but I think we will be closer to the 1957-59 asian flu which had 70k deaths in the US and 2 million global BUT maybe that's even too much https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza_A_virus_subtype_H2N2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influenza_A_virus_subtype_H2N2
- oska 7y agoExcept downplaying it is exactly what you are doing, based solely on a personal opinion which you do not back up in any way.