4 ms·

This is an excellent analysis. For me the key quote is “One of the trends that’s jumped out is that lockdown orders have tended to ratify public behaviour as mu

by qubex 6y ago

This is an excellent analysis. For me the key quote is “One of the trends that’s jumped out is that lockdown orders have tended to ratify public behaviour as much as prescribe or circumscribe it”. The author argues quite convincingly (with transportation data) that the decision to lockdown is, as he writes, ‘crowdsourced’ and coming from a groundswell of micro-decisions made on the individual level, and that consequentially the debate on lifting lockdown orders is rather moot: people will likely continue to be very prudent after the orders are lifted just as they were very prudent before they were officially promulgated.

IIAOPSW 6y ago
>people will likely continue to be very prudent after the orders are lifted just as they were very prudent before they were officially promulgated. The debate is not moot because an imprudent minority can ruin it for the rest of us. Based on the models I've seen, the % of people disobeying the lockdown (even an informal lockdown) has a highly non-linear affect on the effectiveness.
- djsumdog 6y ago
  But what is the end game? This is in the environment and it can't possibly be eradicated at this point; except maybe in New Zealand. In Sweden and the UK, it's most likely just going to go through the population until they're a reasonable immunity. That will set other countries who have eradicated the virus in an interesting state, with little natural immunity, they may not be able to open their borders again for a very long time. People are already spreading this through basic supply and grocery store runs. People are getting it from family they live with. It's going to spread no matter what, through the people who still hang out once or twice a week with their best friends. I think it's silly to plague shame people at this point. We are looking at each other in constant fear for something no one can control; based off information from experiments only a subset of the population can replicate, reported to us by media and governments who have repeatedly lied to us. There is no way we will realistically see a vaccine in 18 months. That's big pharma insanity. Should we simply stay locked down forever? or until one of these drugs/compounds works? Humans are not cogs in a machine you can simply stop, or a device you can put in standby or low power state. We're human beings.
  - loopz 6y ago
    We stopped uncontrolled contagion. Next steps are mitigation in order to keep contagion low enough. We don't know how immunity works for this novel virus, so research, massive testing and improved tracing. Borders can open up when countries cooperate. Prove better medicine to reduce ICU time. Work while embracing the remaining uncertainties.
  - collyw 6y ago
    No one ever offers a long term plan. I have posted some comments similar to your on facebook. People will nitpick details but no one says how long we should remain in lockdown. We were told we needed lockdown to flatten the curve. We have managed that (I am in Spain). Now it's all about new normal and completely screwing the economy with little evidence about the effectiveness of the measures.
  - Gibbon1 6y ago
    > This is in the environment and it can't possibly be eradicated at this point This pure defeatism.
TylerE 6y ago
The problem with this is that much of the relief for both businesses and employees is tied to the order. If they could be open, they no longer qualify for aid if they choose not to be.
- votepaunchy 6y ago
  The Unemployment Insurance bonus runs through July. Many businesses are looking to this to preserve wages while reducing payroll. And I have not heard of this program being capped and running out of funding as has happened with PPP. “California workers who see their hours cut as little as 10% due to the coronavirus outbreak are eligible to receive the entire $600-a-week federal subsidy offered in the $2-trillion federal rescue package, state officials and employment experts say.” https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-04-27/coronavirus-relief-law-workers-reduced-hours https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-04-27/coronaviru...
orwin 6y ago
The conclusion might be right (and the analysis may be excellent), but the arguments seems to be based on carefully chosen data and ignoring other graphs. I'm a bit distrustful i have to admit, especially when an article is music to my ear and confirm my beliefs with public data.
aiscapehumanity 6y ago
That's false if the amount of traffic I saw the other day in my reopening in my local area of my state is anything to go by. As prude as people got was a seemingly 1/3ish with some type of mask, social distancing was dropped.
sifar 6y ago
They are crowdsourced if only in the sense because that is how the crowd has been trained to think. The peoples reaction to isolate, stay indoors was not spontaneous and though prudent, certainly not individual. There was a lot of group think involved. If there is one thing that this pandemic has taught me, it is this - the extent of the thought/behavior control machinery spans the globe, and is effective. Edit: This is an example of abuse of data and hence arriving at an incorrect position which can then drive policies. The author plots the transportation data and the graph decline clearly shows people choosing to not travel. What it doesn't show is the propaganda broadcast preceding those times which "informed" the people and consequently altered their behavior. If you do, you'll see a sharp increase just before the transportation decline.

by qubex 6y ago

IIAOPSW 6y ago

>people will likely continue to be very prudent after the orders are lifted just as they were very prudent before they were officially promulgated. The debate is not moot because an imprudent minority can ruin it for the rest of us. Based on the models I've seen, the % of people disobeying the lockdown (even an informal lockdown) has a highly non-linear affect on the effectiveness.

djsumdog 6y ago
But what is the end game? This is in the environment and it can't possibly be eradicated at this point; except maybe in New Zealand. In Sweden and the UK, it's most likely just going to go through the population until they're a reasonable immunity. That will set other countries who have eradicated the virus in an interesting state, with little natural immunity, they may not be able to open their borders again for a very long time. People are already spreading this through basic supply and grocery store runs. People are getting it from family they live with. It's going to spread no matter what, through the people who still hang out once or twice a week with their best friends. I think it's silly to plague shame people at this point. We are looking at each other in constant fear for something no one can control; based off information from experiments only a subset of the population can replicate, reported to us by media and governments who have repeatedly lied to us. There is no way we will realistically see a vaccine in 18 months. That's big pharma insanity. Should we simply stay locked down forever? or until one of these drugs/compounds works? Humans are not cogs in a machine you can simply stop, or a device you can put in standby or low power state. We're human beings.
- loopz 6y ago
  We stopped uncontrolled contagion. Next steps are mitigation in order to keep contagion low enough. We don't know how immunity works for this novel virus, so research, massive testing and improved tracing. Borders can open up when countries cooperate. Prove better medicine to reduce ICU time. Work while embracing the remaining uncertainties.
- collyw 6y ago
  No one ever offers a long term plan. I have posted some comments similar to your on facebook. People will nitpick details but no one says how long we should remain in lockdown. We were told we needed lockdown to flatten the curve. We have managed that (I am in Spain). Now it's all about new normal and completely screwing the economy with little evidence about the effectiveness of the measures.
- Gibbon1 6y ago
  > This is in the environment and it can't possibly be eradicated at this point This pure defeatism.

TylerE 6y ago

The problem with this is that much of the relief for both businesses and employees is tied to the order. If they could be open, they no longer qualify for aid if they choose not to be.

votepaunchy 6y ago
The Unemployment Insurance bonus runs through July. Many businesses are looking to this to preserve wages while reducing payroll. And I have not heard of this program being capped and running out of funding as has happened with PPP. “California workers who see their hours cut as little as 10% due to the coronavirus outbreak are eligible to receive the entire $600-a-week federal subsidy offered in the $2-trillion federal rescue package, state officials and employment experts say.” https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-04-27/coronavirus-relief-law-workers-reduced-hours https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-04-27/coronaviru...

orwin 6y ago

The conclusion might be right (and the analysis may be excellent), but the arguments seems to be based on carefully chosen data and ignoring other graphs. I'm a bit distrustful i have to admit, especially when an article is music to my ear and confirm my beliefs with public data.

aiscapehumanity 6y ago

That's false if the amount of traffic I saw the other day in my reopening in my local area of my state is anything to go by. As prude as people got was a seemingly 1/3ish with some type of mask, social distancing was dropped.

sifar 6y ago

They are crowdsourced if only in the sense because that is how the crowd has been trained to think. The peoples reaction to isolate, stay indoors was not spontaneous and though prudent, certainly not individual. There was a lot of group think involved. If there is one thing that this pandemic has taught me, it is this - the extent of the thought/behavior control machinery spans the globe, and is effective. Edit: This is an example of abuse of data and hence arriving at an incorrect position which can then drive policies. The author plots the transportation data and the graph decline clearly shows people choosing to not travel. What it doesn't show is the propaganda broadcast preceding those times which "informed" the people and consequently altered their behavior. If you do, you'll see a sharp increase just before the transportation decline.