guscost

52 ms·

541.
by guscost 6y ago
And these antibodies are excluded by any test specific to COVID-19 (since this situation would be considered a false-positive).
542.
by guscost 6y ago
"It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair
543.
by guscost 6y ago
I've sent a message to my district representative, encouraging a change to the law: > In Green v. AOL (2003), the court established: > There is no real dispute that Green's fundamental tort claim is that AOL was negligent i
544.
Pandemic Woo(guscost.com)
1 points by guscost 6y ago|0 comments
545.
by guscost 6y ago
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4873896/ > Trade-offs between different components of parasite fitness provide the dominant conceptual framework for understanding the adaptive evolution of vir
546.
by guscost 6y ago
Don’t you mean sensitivity dropping off? The way it’s phrased sounds like someone is more likely to get a false positive as time passes after... no infection happened?
547.
by guscost 6y ago
Just took the Quest version today. I traveled a lot in February but only felt mildly under-the-weather once, so it's a long shot. Even if I was exposed, we don't really know the seroconversion rates for mild/asymptomatic case
548.
by guscost 6y ago
> Our serological validation was chiefly limited by use of excess serum specimens from a mostly hospitalized population known to be very recently infected with SARS-CoV-2. Basically, this test may not be as sensitive (or patients may not
549.
by guscost 6y ago
I think that you are considerably underestimating how small and numerous viruses are, and how difficult one like this is to stop once it's spreading in a community. They've evolved for billions of years to do exactly this, and the
550.
by guscost 6y ago
> That’s why I get so annoyed by the many commentators on the sidelines who, without much insight, criticize the scientists and policymakers trying hard to get the epidemic under control. That’s very unfair. Do viral epidemiologists have
551.
by guscost 6y ago
If you could find a working flight attendant who is still susceptible to COVID-19, I’d be astounded. Crazy times.
552.
by guscost 6y ago
> The most famous example is of course Hawking's prediction that black holes emit thermal radiation and will eventually evaporate. Ahhh you're right, that's a gravitational-scale thing! But even a rotating black hole has a
553.
by guscost 6y ago
> This amounts to saying "we don't yet have a good theory of quantum gravity" Er, yep. Thanks for taking the time to do roundabout arguments that lead to this very simple thing that we're not even disagreeing about. S
554.
by guscost 6y ago
Nice catch, thanks. Most of them are not, you'll find out: https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/patients-with-heart-at... https://boston.cbslocal.com/2020/05/04/coronavirus-covid-19
555.
by guscost 6y ago
If anyone knows how to get a small dose of SARS-CoV-2 in a controlled manner today, please let me know. I'm not joking, I want this thing done as soon as possible, and I'm healthy enough where it's no problem. Sign up for cha
556.
by guscost 6y ago
CDC is estimating that a little less than 40% of the excess deaths in the past few weeks were not caused by COVID-19: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid19/excess_deaths.htm
557.
by guscost 6y ago
> Even in hotspots like New York City that have been hit hardest by the pandemic, initial studies suggest that perhaps 15-21%6,7 of people have been exposed so far. That's people with antibodies, not necessarily everyone who was exp
558.
by guscost 6y ago
We're talking past each other, I'm just looking for any example of a QM theory predicting something that overlaps with GR, which doesn't rely on a kludge like the renormalization in Loop Quantum Gravity, and therefore hasn&#x
559.
by guscost 6y ago
"What is the relation between Godel’s theorem and whether we can formulate the theory of the universe in terms of a finite number of principles? One connection is obvious. According to the positivist philosophy of science, a physical t
560.
by guscost 6y ago
> So is an investigation into whether pixel X on the screen will be shaded scientific? Popper would say no. If we reason that ZFC should be consistent via induction, we can predict that no pixel will ever show up. But this does not seem
561.
by guscost 6y ago
Great arguments, thank you.
562.
by guscost 6y ago
Thanks, I think this makes sense, and it's quite a trip! But I'm a little foggy about any differences between "externally inconsistent", "indeed inconsistent", and "inconsistent overall". I'm als
563.
by guscost 6y ago
It was a bit tongue-in-cheek there, modernist pretty much means "traditionalist" in this context. Philosophers have long since moved on to post-modernism and post-postmodernism and meta-modernism and all sorts of other nonsense. K
564.
by guscost 6y ago
> I don't understand what you mean. If I make a prediction in curved spacetime... Perhaps "make a risky prediction that could be falsified if spacetime was in fact not curved " is a better phrasing. Spacetime is spacetime
565.
by guscost 6y ago
And yet ornithologists understand birds much better than birds understand themselves.
566.
by guscost 6y ago
It's very weird to argue with someone well-informed who seems to be (much) more of a modernist than I am. Cheers.
567.
by guscost 6y ago
> not all features of our models of nature are features of nature itself. Bingo! Therefore our models are each wrong in some way. Paradigm shifts happen when a new model (theory, paradigm, etc) that is "less wrong" conquers an
568.
by guscost 6y ago
When you say " do non-perturbative QFT in curved spacetime" you don't mean "make a risky prediction that could be falsified in non-curved spacetime", right? As I understand it the whole purpose of perturbation is
569.
by guscost 6y ago
In a profound sense, science is the application of formal systems to the natural world. Within those systems "truth" absolutely does intend to mean "truth". > the theorem "the previous axioms are inconsistent wit
570.
by guscost 6y ago
It doesn't matter who cares about it, Godel proved that anything Kuhn calls a "paradigm" must be inconsistent and/or incomplete, and therefore must fail eventually. If that were not true, then some complete paradigm

More ›