3 ms·

> There is in http://nrg.cs.ucl.ac.uk/mjh/covid19/#w http://nrg.cs.ucl.ac.uk/mjh/covid19/#w which I said matches what I've found rather well There may be data

> There is in http://nrg.cs.ucl.ac.uk/mjh/covid19/#w http://nrg.cs.ucl.ac.uk/mjh/covid19/#w which I said matches what I've found rather well There may be data there, but if I understand you correctly you did not have it when you made your first post. It is therefore inadmissible evidence as to whether your first post was a reasonable thing to write. > Yes he does, If you have decided you want to be an epidemiologist, or at least to learn their skillset, whose responsibility is it to fulfill that desire? I don't think there is a reasonable answer to that other than "mine."

throwaway_pdp09 7y ago
> but if I understand you correctly you did not have it when you made your first post correct > It is therefore inadmissible evidence as to whether your first post was a reasonable thing to write. Completely wrong. I approximated the lowest part of a logistic function with e^x, which is reasonable for small values. Given it matched well with professional epidemiologists' graphs, it suggests I'm getting it approximately right. > whose responsibility is it to fulfill that desire? Mine and yours. Don't stick 'reasonable' on your replies and suppose it insures you in any way cos it doesn't.
- andrepd 7y ago
  Mate I can start to pontificate randomly about aeronautics design, and you can very well tell me to shut up with no requirement that you are an expert yourself.
- alien_ 7y ago
  There's a quote that states that all models are wrong, some happen to be useful. With this in mind I think we should stop nitpicking on non-specialists who try to raise awareness of this pandemic. Yes there might be some differences from what a specialist would have done. Due to the speed at which the situation evolves and the inability to test everyone daily there are lots of unknowns so even a specialist may not be able to give a more much precise figure, everything is going to be a rough estimate. This is a very serious situation and it's better to err on the caution side, people's lives depend on everyone doing their part. Non-constructive criticism of people who raise awareness will erode people's buy-in and people will die because of this.

throwaway_pdp09 7y ago

> but if I understand you correctly you did not have it when you made your first post correct > It is therefore inadmissible evidence as to whether your first post was a reasonable thing to write. Completely wrong. I approximated the lowest part of a logistic function with e^x, which is reasonable for small values. Given it matched well with professional epidemiologists' graphs, it suggests I'm getting it approximately right. > whose responsibility is it to fulfill that desire? Mine and yours. Don't stick 'reasonable' on your replies and suppose it insures you in any way cos it doesn't.

andrepd 7y ago
Mate I can start to pontificate randomly about aeronautics design, and you can very well tell me to shut up with no requirement that you are an expert yourself.
alien_ 7y ago
There's a quote that states that all models are wrong, some happen to be useful. With this in mind I think we should stop nitpicking on non-specialists who try to raise awareness of this pandemic. Yes there might be some differences from what a specialist would have done. Due to the speed at which the situation evolves and the inability to test everyone daily there are lots of unknowns so even a specialist may not be able to give a more much precise figure, everything is going to be a rough estimate. This is a very serious situation and it's better to err on the caution side, people's lives depend on everyone doing their part. Non-constructive criticism of people who raise awareness will erode people's buy-in and people will die because of this.