4 ms·

Additionally, mask usage is seriously high at these protests. I’ll literally be marching down the street and see folks on rooftop bars, beers in hand, elbow to

Additionally, mask usage is seriously high at these protests. I’ll literally be marching down the street and see folks on rooftop bars, beers in hand, elbow to elbow, not a mask in sight. that scares me more than a protest where you can freely trail behind at distance.

clairity 6y ago
if they’re outside and elbow-to-elbow, then it means they’re likely not continuously spitting in each others’ faces. it’s marginally better if they stood a little farther apart but that risk shouldn’t scare you. worry about real risks, like police with riot gear.
- monadic2 6y ago
  Somehow I don’t have your confidence—I haven’t even gone inside the bars. Anyway I’m not worried for myself, I’m gonna be fine in all likelihood—it’s my at-risk friends and family.
  - clairity 6y ago
    too many people are beholden to irrational fear with this pandemic, rather than understanding. going into a bar is not a problem for your at-risk friends or family. it's what you do inside that matters. having a physically distant beer with a friend (assuming an uncrowded bar, as is required in most places) is quite low risk. geting hammered and carrying on with a bunch of in-your-face strangers is not. just avoid exchanging spit with strangers. being outside is the easiest and best method, and maintaining a little distance is a close second. wear a mask indoors if you can't maintain distance. it's easy. then you can set the fear aside and move on with your life.
djaque 6y ago
I went to a protest in my town and there wasn't an unmasked person in sight. I think that if you showed up without one, you would get called out and asked to leave.
- saiya-jin 6y ago
  Serious question from non-US person - isn't one of the main reasons to also get some anonymity? As IT guy I know damn well how good face recognition software works these days, en masse. With all the biometric data US govt has on everybody, pairing would not be that hard for many.
  - vzqx 6y ago
    The (peaceful) protests aren't illegal so anonymity isn't a major concern. Police might be violent towards protestors in the moment, but there's zero risk of the government tracking down and punishing protesters after the fact.
    - evan_ 6y ago
      > there's zero risk of the government tracking down and punishing protesters after the fact. ehhh I wouldn't be so sure about that.
      - ls612 6y ago
        As a matter of policy I would be pretty sure about it. If you weren’t looting or setting fires there will be no organized attempt to find you. Individuals within the government may take on personal vendettas from this but the risk of that to the average protest attendee is so low due to sheer numbers.
    - trfhuhg 6y ago
      That's very good sarcasm right there. Perhaps the many years in the corporate world have made me too cynical, but I'd expect all and every protestor to be captured on cameras, identified later with face recognition software (remember that Amazon's FaceRekognition had contracts with PDs?), matched with photos on driver licenses and over the next few months they would be quietly, but mercilessly punished for the dissent. The only real question is whether the FR software work when face is mostly covered with a mask and sunglasses? It technically can, because ears, hair, head shape and shoulders shape is a unique enough combination.
glofish 6y ago
masks, when worn by the general (or asymptomatic) population have not been proven to reduce the spread of SARS-COV-2 - no seriously there is no evidence to support mask usage - the belief that mask do anything is nothing more than a superstition - the virus take the form of an an aerosol that is not stopped by a little cotton thing in front of your nose do you honestly believe that a little rag in front of your mouth will reduce the spread in big crowd everyone screaming at the same time? the protest might just prove false all the scaremongering, this is what I see very as a likely outcome and that the disease does not propagate outdoors, that the disease does not propage by touch etc.
- n9 6y ago
  The studies that show that masks reduce the R0 of COVID-19 are many and broad. https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-19-prevention.html https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-... The latest ones that I have read indicate an 85% reduction of transmission and infection between two people wearing masks, a double 85% reduction. Where is an instance of a study that indicates the opposite? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
  - dehrmann 6y ago
    From your link: > the authors note that the findings on face masks and eye protection are based on limited evidence You also have to consider second-order effects like a sense of invulnerability from the mask and added social interactions because people feel safer. Those haven't been studied.
  - sethammons 6y ago
    I find it interesting that the paper suggests that contracting COVID through your eyes is twice as prevalent compared to breathing it in. See 3% rate for non-mask vs 6% for non-eye-protection. Why are we not all wearing eye protection too?
dehrmann 6y ago
The current consensus on face masks is they might/probably help when used in addition to social distancing. There haven't been enough good studies, second-order effects (like a sense of invulnerability, induced demand) aren't studied, and materials and construction vary too much. I have no idea how to feel about not seeing them, and I've seen enough common sense turn out to be wrong that I won't fall back on it.

clairity 6y ago

if they’re outside and elbow-to-elbow, then it means they’re likely not continuously spitting in each others’ faces. it’s marginally better if they stood a little farther apart but that risk shouldn’t scare you. worry about real risks, like police with riot gear.

monadic2 6y ago
Somehow I don’t have your confidence—I haven’t even gone inside the bars. Anyway I’m not worried for myself, I’m gonna be fine in all likelihood—it’s my at-risk friends and family.
- clairity 6y ago
  too many people are beholden to irrational fear with this pandemic, rather than understanding. going into a bar is not a problem for your at-risk friends or family. it's what you do inside that matters. having a physically distant beer with a friend (assuming an uncrowded bar, as is required in most places) is quite low risk. geting hammered and carrying on with a bunch of in-your-face strangers is not. just avoid exchanging spit with strangers. being outside is the easiest and best method, and maintaining a little distance is a close second. wear a mask indoors if you can't maintain distance. it's easy. then you can set the fear aside and move on with your life.

djaque 6y ago

I went to a protest in my town and there wasn't an unmasked person in sight. I think that if you showed up without one, you would get called out and asked to leave.

saiya-jin 6y ago
Serious question from non-US person - isn't one of the main reasons to also get some anonymity? As IT guy I know damn well how good face recognition software works these days, en masse. With all the biometric data US govt has on everybody, pairing would not be that hard for many.
- vzqx 6y ago
  The (peaceful) protests aren't illegal so anonymity isn't a major concern. Police might be violent towards protestors in the moment, but there's zero risk of the government tracking down and punishing protesters after the fact.
  - evan_ 6y ago
    > there's zero risk of the government tracking down and punishing protesters after the fact. ehhh I wouldn't be so sure about that.
    - ls612 6y ago
      As a matter of policy I would be pretty sure about it. If you weren’t looting or setting fires there will be no organized attempt to find you. Individuals within the government may take on personal vendettas from this but the risk of that to the average protest attendee is so low due to sheer numbers.
  - trfhuhg 6y ago
    That's very good sarcasm right there. Perhaps the many years in the corporate world have made me too cynical, but I'd expect all and every protestor to be captured on cameras, identified later with face recognition software (remember that Amazon's FaceRekognition had contracts with PDs?), matched with photos on driver licenses and over the next few months they would be quietly, but mercilessly punished for the dissent. The only real question is whether the FR software work when face is mostly covered with a mask and sunglasses? It technically can, because ears, hair, head shape and shoulders shape is a unique enough combination.

glofish 6y ago

masks, when worn by the general (or asymptomatic) population have not been proven to reduce the spread of SARS-COV-2 - no seriously there is no evidence to support mask usage - the belief that mask do anything is nothing more than a superstition - the virus take the form of an an aerosol that is not stopped by a little cotton thing in front of your nose do you honestly believe that a little rag in front of your mouth will reduce the spread in big crowd everyone screaming at the same time? the protest might just prove false all the scaremongering, this is what I see very as a likely outcome and that the disease does not propagate outdoors, that the disease does not propage by touch etc.

n9 6y ago
The studies that show that masks reduce the R0 of COVID-19 are many and broad. https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-19-prevention.html https://www.livescience.com/face-masks-eye-protection-covid-... The latest ones that I have read indicate an 85% reduction of transmission and infection between two people wearing masks, a double 85% reduction. Where is an instance of a study that indicates the opposite? Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
- dehrmann 6y ago
  From your link: > the authors note that the findings on face masks and eye protection are based on limited evidence You also have to consider second-order effects like a sense of invulnerability from the mask and added social interactions because people feel safer. Those haven't been studied.
- sethammons 6y ago
  I find it interesting that the paper suggests that contracting COVID through your eyes is twice as prevalent compared to breathing it in. See 3% rate for non-mask vs 6% for non-eye-protection. Why are we not all wearing eye protection too?

dehrmann 6y ago

The current consensus on face masks is they might/probably help when used in addition to social distancing. There haven't been enough good studies, second-order effects (like a sense of invulnerability, induced demand) aren't studied, and materials and construction vary too much. I have no idea how to feel about not seeing them, and I've seen enough common sense turn out to be wrong that I won't fall back on it.