glofish

44 ms·

451.
by glofish 7y ago
Mortality is almost always much lower than the initially reported and observed numbers. There could be many more people that never even get to the testing phase.
452.
by glofish 7y ago
for me, it not so unthinkable that you could have intermittent access to the internet (out days at a time), or that some parts of the internet would not be accessible for extended periods of time for you it seems that must equate the end of
453.
by glofish 7y ago
To me the explanation is straigthfoward Take any disease that kills 99% of those that get it. You are going to be a lot more scared of it, than one that kills 0.1% of infected targets. It does not matter if the overall death number is the s
454.
by glofish 7y ago
> This is another misconception. Care to elaborate on what my misconception was? I never said that bitcoin is not an interesting concept on its own. Just that is ain't got what most people think or need when they talk about gold or
455.
by glofish 7y ago
If you print $100 in your basement it is counterfeiting, punishable with 25 years in prison. If you print 1 trillion as a banker it is called" "a bold initiative to calm market tumult".
456.
by glofish 7y ago
does not need to go anywhere, cash is a form of storage
457.
by glofish 7y ago
because bitcoin is not money, it is an asset, it is a property that can be traded for money but its value fluctuates and is not tied to anything other than people's perceived future value in it (which can be valuable, don't get me
458.
by glofish 7y ago
bitcoin is not really "there" the same way as gold is. The whole point of gold is that it is a tangible asset. You can hold gold in your pocket or under your mattress and it costs nothing to store it. You can't prove you have
459.
by glofish 7y ago
Society responds very differently to a 20% hospitalization rate versus a 2% one. Emotion is a driving factor. The problem is panic, which will overwhelm hospitals sooner than the actual hospitalization rate. Thus a 2% rate is much much bett
460.
by glofish 7y ago
These guys are like George in Seinfeld. So wrong about absolutely everything that doing the exact opposite is the winning strategy. On a serious note, remember that they are not your friends at all. They make money when the rest of the inve
461.
by glofish 7y ago
I think that initially there is a strong selection for discovering cases that do require hospital care. We'll see what the future holds. In China the CFR (crude fatality rate) started at 17% and dropped to 0.7%, check figure 4 here: h
462.
by glofish 7y ago
They were trying to kill off Linux for decades. Yet most science ran on Linux/Unix. there is actually a lot many more examples, I am just summarizing in one sentence.
463.
by glofish 7y ago
We'll see but I think in six months the outbreak will be a distant memory. And we'll be wondering why were we so unprepared (psychologically) that is. The disease is not nearly as severe to warrant this much worry. 15K people alre
464.
by glofish 7y ago
Historical analysis says that generally speaking, dollar cost averaging is inferior to one-time lump sum investments unless you buy lump-sum at the very top of a bull cycle. Lump-sum investment is usually better in all other cases, you get
465.
by glofish 7y ago
the average price of a house in 1959 was $10K for a disposable income o $351 (3.5%) the average price of a house in 2020 is $270K for a disposable income of $16K (5.9%) We have larger disposable income but the difference is not nearly as s
466.
by glofish 7y ago
the point was that once the production is destroyed you can't catch up, retooling is very expensive,
467.
by glofish 7y ago
I am trying to understand that graph, it is not so easy actually. What does it mean that 2020 shows 15K average disposable income in the US? That the average person has 15K left once they pay absolutely necessary to subsist? I find it hard
468.
by glofish 7y ago
All lost in the upheaval is that you can't "just take" a course in a classroom and make it online - especially not on a two-three days notice. Online courses are surprisingly difficult to get right. Here is what I predict thi
469.
by glofish 7y ago
This is an excellent point. Bill Gates has money because he created a product that set back science for decades. It still hurts science today. The way Windows differentiates itself from Unix for the sole reason of not being compatible has s
470.
by glofish 7y ago
right, and that is what the interest rate is for, it accounts for that risks and spreads it around over the many applicants.
471.
by glofish 7y ago
You are pre-selling your own work and productivity. That value that backs up that money will be created by you.
472.
by glofish 7y ago
my offer is that in two years we look back at this and a reasonable majority of health professionals will say: "you know that home testing by Gates was not such a good idea, overall it caused more harm than good" My view is that i
473.
by glofish 7y ago
the analogy is not even remotely valid taking someone's temperature is a well-known concept with long tradition - fever is not something that started occurring in the last two weeks. if people would did not know what fever meant and ho
474.
by glofish 7y ago
Someone sitting in their house is testing themselves is not data! You are confusing data with a number that ticks up. Ha, another infected! Look DATA! The potential for misuse, abuse, panic and trouble is far bigger than you imagine. The pr
475.
by glofish 7y ago
Hysteria: emotional excess. Not sure why you assume "hysteria" on my side. My opinion could be wrong, but that does not make it a hysteria. Isn't the fear of COVID more a hysteria? As for your bet - it is overly specific - th
476.
by glofish 7y ago
"never works like that" was meant to reflect that naive, knee jerk solutions never account for all the complexities of the problem and do more harm than good. distributing COVID tests to the population is a ridiculous idea that do
477.
by glofish 7y ago
because it never works like that, never that simple, there are always bigger costs in the end this will be used against you and others next thing you know you are not allowed on a bus if you haven't tested yourself today
478.
by glofish 7y ago
testing should not be done Random Joe at home! there is tons of data, it helps no one when unqualified people add to the noise, you think it helps you, but the tragedy that it only makes things worse
479.
by glofish 7y ago
If anything sets a bad precedent, citizens starting testing themselves and each other, what could possibly go wrong (sarcasm)... Should we test for flu, cold as well? All other diseases? Should you only be allowed to be somewhere if you tes
480.
by glofish 7y ago
sending someone a link via email is a relatively common task. why would it be undesirable to write short code that can do that?

More ›