6 ms·

But that just moves the compliance and logistics problem back one step. Who's doing this massive amount of testing? If it's the government, you'd need armies of

But that just moves the compliance and logistics problem back one step. Who's doing this massive amount of testing? If it's the government, you'd need armies of workers spread out everywhere. If it's the owners of these buildings, who checks to ensure compliance? Imagine trying to enforce this on every non-residential building in, say, NYC. It would be practically impossible.

jedberg 6y ago
> If it's the owners of these buildings, who checks to ensure compliance? Who checks to make sure every restaurant follows the standards of cleanliness? They have inspectors who (theoretically) show up randomly, so it ensures most places comply voluntarily, because the cost of getting caught is very high. A combination of random inspections and steep fines would solve the compliance problem. Edit: I just had another idea. Offer cash rewards to people who can prove they they weren't tested when entering a public place (which the business pays for via fines). You'd have people running around trying to find missed testing for the cash reward.
- philwelch 6y ago
  To your point, many businesses and facilities implement safety measures because they fear civil liability for preventable damages. I don’t think that’s likely in this case but if you can get most businesses and facilities to be mostly compliant most of the time, that might be enough.
- sfkdjf9j3j 6y ago
  For this to work I think you would need a much stricter compliance than what is enforced in restaurant cleanliness.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    It doesn't have to be good enough to catch all cases immediately, just good enough that isolated outbreaks can't sustain themselves.
- Marsymars 6y ago
  There are many unlawful activities that could be solved with cash rewards for people reporting said activities.
  - perl4ever 6y ago
    There are many that are. Don't people get rewards for reporting malfeasance to the SEC, or ADA violations? I'm sure I've read about that, as well as about how some people think it's a questionable system. But privatization of enforcement of some regulations is a thing.
chatmasta 6y ago
Now imagine going out shopping, you’re stopped at the door, and you test positive. What happens then? The government puts you in a car and sends you... back to your apartment? Sounds like a dystopian nightmare, to be honest.
- philwelch 6y ago
  The store does not permit you to enter and you are asked to go home and self-quarantine.
  - chatmasta 6y ago
    What if you infect someone on your way back?
    - macintux 6y ago
      You’re still in a much better position than we are today, where you’d infect several people in the store, and again the next day, and the next.
      - lolc 6y ago
        I'm weirded out by this binary thinking arguing against masks or testing. It's like the people who say that helmets don't prevent all injuries, which they conclude means one shouldn't be wearing one. Except that where helmets are only individual protection, measures against infection are affective at a population level, where you profit from others' actions.
- floatingatoll 6y ago
  You are handed a free mask that serves as warning people to give you space, and you are simultaneously logged as being infected with the CDC.
- notatoad 6y ago
  we're in the middle of a pandemic. at some point you've got to accept that dystopia is here, and the dystopian things that are happening are realistic ways of dealing with the situtuation. you can't reject solutions because they sound dystopian unless you've got better, non-dystopian solutions. and everybody has to stay in their homes at all times and all non-essential services are shut down is not a less dystopian solution.
danenania 6y ago
It doesn’t need perfect compliance to push down the R0 significantly. Lockdowns in the US are mostly not being strictly enforced, but enough people are complying to have a major impact. I think economic incentives are also fairly well aligned here. If tests are widespread, a significant segment of the market is likely to prefer locations that are testing to those that don’t, just like the market tends to prefer clean restaurants to unsanitary ones.

jedberg 6y ago

> If it's the owners of these buildings, who checks to ensure compliance? Who checks to make sure every restaurant follows the standards of cleanliness? They have inspectors who (theoretically) show up randomly, so it ensures most places comply voluntarily, because the cost of getting caught is very high. A combination of random inspections and steep fines would solve the compliance problem. Edit: I just had another idea. Offer cash rewards to people who can prove they they weren't tested when entering a public place (which the business pays for via fines). You'd have people running around trying to find missed testing for the cash reward.

philwelch 6y ago
To your point, many businesses and facilities implement safety measures because they fear civil liability for preventable damages. I don’t think that’s likely in this case but if you can get most businesses and facilities to be mostly compliant most of the time, that might be enough.
sfkdjf9j3j 6y ago
For this to work I think you would need a much stricter compliance than what is enforced in restaurant cleanliness.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  It doesn't have to be good enough to catch all cases immediately, just good enough that isolated outbreaks can't sustain themselves.
Marsymars 6y ago
There are many unlawful activities that could be solved with cash rewards for people reporting said activities.
- perl4ever 6y ago
  There are many that are. Don't people get rewards for reporting malfeasance to the SEC, or ADA violations? I'm sure I've read about that, as well as about how some people think it's a questionable system. But privatization of enforcement of some regulations is a thing.

chatmasta 6y ago

Now imagine going out shopping, you’re stopped at the door, and you test positive. What happens then? The government puts you in a car and sends you... back to your apartment? Sounds like a dystopian nightmare, to be honest.

philwelch 6y ago
The store does not permit you to enter and you are asked to go home and self-quarantine.
- chatmasta 6y ago
  What if you infect someone on your way back?
  - macintux 6y ago
    You’re still in a much better position than we are today, where you’d infect several people in the store, and again the next day, and the next.
    - lolc 6y ago
      I'm weirded out by this binary thinking arguing against masks or testing. It's like the people who say that helmets don't prevent all injuries, which they conclude means one shouldn't be wearing one. Except that where helmets are only individual protection, measures against infection are affective at a population level, where you profit from others' actions.
floatingatoll 6y ago
You are handed a free mask that serves as warning people to give you space, and you are simultaneously logged as being infected with the CDC.
notatoad 6y ago
we're in the middle of a pandemic. at some point you've got to accept that dystopia is here, and the dystopian things that are happening are realistic ways of dealing with the situtuation. you can't reject solutions because they sound dystopian unless you've got better, non-dystopian solutions. and everybody has to stay in their homes at all times and all non-essential services are shut down is not a less dystopian solution.

danenania 6y ago

It doesn’t need perfect compliance to push down the R0 significantly. Lockdowns in the US are mostly not being strictly enforced, but enough people are complying to have a major impact. I think economic incentives are also fairly well aligned here. If tests are widespread, a significant segment of the market is likely to prefer locations that are testing to those that don’t, just like the market tends to prefer clean restaurants to unsanitary ones.