3 ms·

Silicon valley and its larger orbit are all about exponential growth curves. It's weird to me that so many people dont get the concern about COVID. "But the num

by api 6y ago

Silicon valley and its larger orbit are all about exponential growth curves. It's weird to me that so many people dont get the concern about COVID. "But the numbers are so small!" Elon is the most puzzling to me. He was one of the PayPal crew. I'm sure their initial numbers were small. I recall Thiel talking about how in the beginning they didn't understand what a rocket ship PayPal was. Well... this thing spreads quite exponentially too if distancing measures and masks are not used, and lethality is at least 1% (higher among older people) not to mention potential lung and brain damage. You exponential curve junkies need to do some math. Personally I think it will take a million deaths for Americans to notice what an exponential curve is. We are at about 140k right now. Given that its exponential that could be by October. "But we can't afford to close any more!" Other countries with competent leaders and a population that doesn't live entirely in a social media bubble fantasy world have slowed the virus to the point that they can now reopen cautiously. Canada recently had a huge hiring boom. China is back in business. We can't reopen because we failed the first time. We are incompetent from the top all the way down to the street level.

acdha 6y ago
It’s not that they don’t get it as much as they have a financial incentive to pretend otherwise. Elon Musk is not an engineer dispassionately analyzing a problem but a factory owner whose business is facing both a downturn in demand and substantial costs to redesign business operations to be safe under current conditions. The more he can promote re-opening as workers having to take on additional uncompensated risk, the more he stands to personally profit. You see this all the way up to the top: nobody pushing for schools to have normal in-person classes has children or grandchildren who need to go to public school rather than being tutored but their business interests need you to have a place to send your kids so you can go to work.
- api 6y ago
  That isn't rational. What does he think will happen to demand when millions are dying and the government instituted mandatory curfew under a national state of emergency? I could see short sighted pointy haired bosses doing that but he seems like a systems level thinker. It would have made sense for him to advocate a strong response early some we can really get back to business. Maybe he realizes that America is too dysfunctional to stop the virus so the whole thing is futile. But he's not saying that, and his Twitter history doesn't suggest someone who is afraid to say whatever he thinks. He's publicly blunt to a fault. To me it appears he's drunk some bad kool aid. The fact that he's a brilliant engineer and a great businessman doesn't make him immune to being irrational in other contexts. Another possibility is that he's trying to win a big SpaceX contract and must publicly echo the Trump line to do so. Trump is quite well known to personally go after anyone who does not echo his party line and feed his ego. Also possible that he does not want to risk Trump interference via the FCC with the Starlink launch. It has to be one of the two things I listed. It's just too irrational and he's too smart.
  - acdha 6y ago
    People are rational a lot less frequently than we like to think. Having a large amount of money on the line is an especially effective way to be tempted to avoid it and, as you mentioned, there are political considerations – he mostly donates to Republicans (presumably with business goals in mind), he has contracts which Trump appointees oversee, and nobody wants to risk being part of the next presidential tantrum. All of that makes it so easy to say “maybe the contrarians are right…” – and working conditions in the Tesla plant suggest that he wasn’t overly concerned with health even beforehand.
sokoloff 6y ago
> and lethality is at least 1% (higher among older people) The first half of that claim is contradicted by most of the recent data I’ve seen, particularly among the young and otherwise reasonably healthy.
- api 6y ago
  Links? I see numbers like 4% on average globally, but those are likely skewed high due to tests being administered mostly to the symptomatic. I estimated 1% for that reason. I also ignored potential non-lethal but bad complications.
  - mrfusion 6y ago
    The CDC says 0.26% IFR over all age groups. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena...
    - leereeves 6y ago
      That did say 0.26%, until July 10. Now, that page says the best estimate is 0.65% IFR. (Infection Fatality Ratio, Overall in table 1)
      - api 6y ago
        That's well over a million fatalities if it spreads across the US unchecked, and does not count complications.
        nkurz 6y ago
        Yes, if we assume a that 50% of the US population becomes infected, a .65% IFR means that over a million Americans will die. Yes, this does not count complications. That said, do you now agree that your earlier statement that "the lethality is at least 1%" is contradicted by the CDC's current best estimate? If so, it would be considered good etiquette to say so, and to thank the other posters for providing you with better information. Or if you still believe your statement is correct, you should explain why the CDC is wrong (or being misinterpreted) and point to an authority you feel is more trustworthy. As it stands, it feels like you are galloping: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop.
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
But it seems to me that your attitude here is a large contributor to why the US was unable to do well. I've consistently seen discussions framed this way from the start, just dripping with contempt for everyone who doesn't know the facts about the virus or doesn't understand what the right response is. It's impossible to build a cohesive social movement that way.

by api 6y ago

acdha 6y ago

It’s not that they don’t get it as much as they have a financial incentive to pretend otherwise. Elon Musk is not an engineer dispassionately analyzing a problem but a factory owner whose business is facing both a downturn in demand and substantial costs to redesign business operations to be safe under current conditions. The more he can promote re-opening as workers having to take on additional uncompensated risk, the more he stands to personally profit. You see this all the way up to the top: nobody pushing for schools to have normal in-person classes has children or grandchildren who need to go to public school rather than being tutored but their business interests need you to have a place to send your kids so you can go to work.

api 6y ago
That isn't rational. What does he think will happen to demand when millions are dying and the government instituted mandatory curfew under a national state of emergency? I could see short sighted pointy haired bosses doing that but he seems like a systems level thinker. It would have made sense for him to advocate a strong response early some we can really get back to business. Maybe he realizes that America is too dysfunctional to stop the virus so the whole thing is futile. But he's not saying that, and his Twitter history doesn't suggest someone who is afraid to say whatever he thinks. He's publicly blunt to a fault. To me it appears he's drunk some bad kool aid. The fact that he's a brilliant engineer and a great businessman doesn't make him immune to being irrational in other contexts. Another possibility is that he's trying to win a big SpaceX contract and must publicly echo the Trump line to do so. Trump is quite well known to personally go after anyone who does not echo his party line and feed his ego. Also possible that he does not want to risk Trump interference via the FCC with the Starlink launch. It has to be one of the two things I listed. It's just too irrational and he's too smart.
- acdha 6y ago
  People are rational a lot less frequently than we like to think. Having a large amount of money on the line is an especially effective way to be tempted to avoid it and, as you mentioned, there are political considerations – he mostly donates to Republicans (presumably with business goals in mind), he has contracts which Trump appointees oversee, and nobody wants to risk being part of the next presidential tantrum. All of that makes it so easy to say “maybe the contrarians are right…” – and working conditions in the Tesla plant suggest that he wasn’t overly concerned with health even beforehand.

sokoloff 6y ago

> and lethality is at least 1% (higher among older people) The first half of that claim is contradicted by most of the recent data I’ve seen, particularly among the young and otherwise reasonably healthy.

api 6y ago
Links? I see numbers like 4% on average globally, but those are likely skewed high due to tests being administered mostly to the symptomatic. I estimated 1% for that reason. I also ignored potential non-lethal but bad complications.
- mrfusion 6y ago
  The CDC says 0.26% IFR over all age groups. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scena...
  - leereeves 6y ago
    That did say 0.26%, until July 10. Now, that page says the best estimate is 0.65% IFR. (Infection Fatality Ratio, Overall in table 1)
    - api 6y ago
      That's well over a million fatalities if it spreads across the US unchecked, and does not count complications.
      - nkurz 6y ago
        Yes, if we assume a that 50% of the US population becomes infected, a .65% IFR means that over a million Americans will die. Yes, this does not count complications. That said, do you now agree that your earlier statement that "the lethality is at least 1%" is contradicted by the CDC's current best estimate? If so, it would be considered good etiquette to say so, and to thank the other posters for providing you with better information. Or if you still believe your statement is correct, you should explain why the CDC is wrong (or being misinterpreted) and point to an authority you feel is more trustworthy. As it stands, it feels like you are galloping: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop.

SpicyLemonZest 6y ago

But it seems to me that your attitude here is a large contributor to why the US was unable to do well. I've consistently seen discussions framed this way from the start, just dripping with contempt for everyone who doesn't know the facts about the virus or doesn't understand what the right response is. It's impossible to build a cohesive social movement that way.