4 ms·

> If you find any faults that can really change the results in the analysis Rootclaim made, I would be interested. This is an interesting way to analyze the pr

by jmull 3y ago

> If you find any faults that can really change the results in the analysis Rootclaim made, I would be interested. This is an interesting way to analyze the problem but the set of criteria and weights applied at each step are made up. The flaw is that you can use this form of analysis to reach any conclusion you want. For example, the "Already well adapted" section -- a "2x" factor for lab escape. We wouldn't even be thinking about this virus if it wasn't well adapted to spread among humans. So that's baked into the ground and isn't a factor of anything. Then take "Furin cleavage" -- a whopping 8x factor for lab escape relative to zoonotic. This is the same thing as already well adapted, so now we've got a combined 16x for something that should be 1x. The weight for "Chimera" -- another whopping 8x for lab escape relative to zoonotic -- seems really high for something that is found both in nature and in labs that merely "seems less likely to combine in nature". We should probably be arguing about whether this is 1.5x or 2x. The real conclusion is we don't know. The Chinese probably do, but it would be a very closely guarded secret and obviously they would never admit to a lab leak. I lot of people hate ambiguity and want an answer, but in this case it doesn't seem that we are going to get one.

throwaway290 3y ago
> it would be a very closely guarded secret and obviously they would never admit to a lab leak A complicating factor is that some (much?) of the funding came from the US. Which means admitting to a leak is against the interest of not only Chinese but also the US government which would have a hell of a time explaining to taxpayers how pandemic was engineered on their money doing research banned in the US. (Though I don't think US government played any part in resisting the research tbh, CCP probably did all that at their accord.) I think all in all we shouldn't give up, and even if we don't find the actual data I don't see the world can be okay without big fat follow up over not some lab making a mistake (humans make those) but all obstruction of research into the origins of what could have been an extinction level event if the virus was a bit better engineered, whether it came from Chinese communist party or US scientists scared for grant money.
- th0ma5 3y ago
  [flagged]
- Xen9 3y ago
  Idea: Community / site for collective truth-seeking. Possibly integrated with Metaculus. One can submit new pieces of evidene which would be commentable (in threads), votable, and programmable (to toggle / affect of other submitted evidence threads). Users can adjust the weights, vote on them (to generate a certain consensus / prediction), and even toggle of pieces of evidence manually. The site automatically gives the probabilities for different scearions. I don't have an instant vision on how "all" possible scenarios would be chosen.
  - ricksunny 3y ago
    Neat idea, if you can keep it from getting gamed. It sounds a little like this RootClaim (I just learned about here) https://www.rootclaim.com/how-rootclaim-works https://www.rootclaim.com/how-rootclaim-works but with the users adjusting & voting on weights? This is a strawman demonstrator I'm wware of w r t origins probability surveying & calculation. https://www.getguesstimate.com/models/18631 https://www.getguesstimate.com/models/18631 It's intended for any one user to evaluate ther priors and see how they stack up all together. like that your idea woukd aggregate & have comments & a voting mechanism,
    - throwaway290 3y ago
      resistance to manipulation can probably come from things like more substantial evidence + personal reputation or identity confirmation. By the way, why do people weigh zoonotic spillover so high relatively to lab leak accident? There were lab leaks before even in Beijing, eg. of the original SARS when it was researched. That SARS kills faster so it didn't get to infect too many people... And that's only what's documented, considering it's China there could've been any number of other times. Intentional leak chance is low but accidental leak is so likely it's surprising this pandemic didn't happen before considering security practies that were known and raised questions before the pandemic. But everyone magically forgets about it. All because some US scientists wanted grant money too much and so laughed everyone who disagrees out of the room.

by jmull 3y ago

throwaway290 3y ago

> it would be a very closely guarded secret and obviously they would never admit to a lab leak A complicating factor is that some (much?) of the funding came from the US. Which means admitting to a leak is against the interest of not only Chinese but also the US government which would have a hell of a time explaining to taxpayers how pandemic was engineered on their money doing research banned in the US. (Though I don't think US government played any part in resisting the research tbh, CCP probably did all that at their accord.) I think all in all we shouldn't give up, and even if we don't find the actual data I don't see the world can be okay without big fat follow up over not some lab making a mistake (humans make those) but all obstruction of research into the origins of what could have been an extinction level event if the virus was a bit better engineered, whether it came from Chinese communist party or US scientists scared for grant money.

th0ma5 3y ago
[flagged]
Xen9 3y ago
Idea: Community / site for collective truth-seeking. Possibly integrated with Metaculus. One can submit new pieces of evidene which would be commentable (in threads), votable, and programmable (to toggle / affect of other submitted evidence threads). Users can adjust the weights, vote on them (to generate a certain consensus / prediction), and even toggle of pieces of evidence manually. The site automatically gives the probabilities for different scearions. I don't have an instant vision on how "all" possible scenarios would be chosen.
- ricksunny 3y ago
  Neat idea, if you can keep it from getting gamed. It sounds a little like this RootClaim (I just learned about here) https://www.rootclaim.com/how-rootclaim-works https://www.rootclaim.com/how-rootclaim-works but with the users adjusting & voting on weights? This is a strawman demonstrator I'm wware of w r t origins probability surveying & calculation. https://www.getguesstimate.com/models/18631 https://www.getguesstimate.com/models/18631 It's intended for any one user to evaluate ther priors and see how they stack up all together. like that your idea woukd aggregate & have comments & a voting mechanism,
  - throwaway290 3y ago
    resistance to manipulation can probably come from things like more substantial evidence + personal reputation or identity confirmation. By the way, why do people weigh zoonotic spillover so high relatively to lab leak accident? There were lab leaks before even in Beijing, eg. of the original SARS when it was researched. That SARS kills faster so it didn't get to infect too many people... And that's only what's documented, considering it's China there could've been any number of other times. Intentional leak chance is low but accidental leak is so likely it's surprising this pandemic didn't happen before considering security practies that were known and raised questions before the pandemic. But everyone magically forgets about it. All because some US scientists wanted grant money too much and so laughed everyone who disagrees out of the room.