ryankemper

14 ms·

61.
by ryankemper 6y ago
And yet, a large part of the reason we weren't overrun is because our initial estimates of hospital beds and ventilators needed were far too high on a per-infected-person basis. So yes, we definitely cut down transmission, but it'
62.
by ryankemper 6y ago
> "I don't want to go to the ER, because I might catch COVID from another patient, or doctor" is a very justifiable fear. The mortality risk of undetected/unaddressed heart problems, etc, far supercedes the risk from
63.
by ryankemper 6y ago
Just saw this comment. Saying "don't censor expression of opinions on online platforms" is not saying "teach creationism" in schools, nor "teach that the earth is flat". In other words I think that's
64.
by ryankemper 6y ago
Sorry, can you clarify? Are you saying removing speech causes genocides, or not removing speech at all?
65.
by ryankemper 6y ago
Yes, but I think trying to map out indirect violence gets into very dangerous territory. So, that's why I draw the line at "directly" advocating violence. Of course, the lines as always get blurry. To use a random example tha
66.
by ryankemper 6y ago
I must admit I find your reply a bit frustrating, because I literally began my comment by addressing what I feel is exactly your argument : > I very strongly feel that we should be very careful to avoid adopting a legalistic attitude t
67.
by ryankemper 6y ago
I personally agree that what David Icke is spreading is a bunch of nonsense. But I'm against suppressing him because otherwise I can't maintain a logically consistent belief system. That is to say, as soon as we can ban the lizard
68.
by ryankemper 6y ago
Right. In general contradiction arises when we try to prevent people from doing stupid things. It becomes very difficult to maintain a logically consistent view on what's okay to censor and what's not. Most of us agree anti-vaxxer
69.
by ryankemper 6y ago
Are you saying that I am entering propaganda territory, or instead that David Icke is/was? The meaning is not clear to me, although I assume you are referring to myself. Again, the distinction here is that I don't think being wr
70.
by ryankemper 6y ago
Couldn't YouTube have adopted Reddit's quarantine concept? (Ignoring for the time-being the inherent tendency of such a concept being used to drive out dissent as happened with Reddit with respect to fringe conservative voices)
71.
by ryankemper 6y ago
I consider your statement to really be saying the following: "According to myself, YouTube is perfectly capable of objectively and correctly deciding that David Icke is full of shit."
72.
by ryankemper 6y ago
Yes, by not addressing that I put myself in the trap where I was forced to respond to it anyway in a later comment. So, in order to avoid repeating myself, I believe I addressed that notion here: https://news.ycombinator.com&#x2F
73.
by ryankemper 6y ago
> Some people, after being exposed to misinformation, chose to believe them. You missed my point :) Humans, being inherently limited, are always at risk of being wrong. Being wrong about things is the default state. I simply don't t
74.
by ryankemper 6y ago
The classic problem - who decides what behavior is benevolent? "$INSERT_POSITIVE_ADJECTIVE despotism" is still despotism. So it comes down to each person's belief set - do they believe that despotism is unfortunate when misap
75.
by ryankemper 6y ago
I very strongly feel that we should be very careful to avoid adopting a legalistic attitude towards freedom of speech. That is, I am opposed to the argument that private corporations are not bound by the first amendment, and therefore it&#x
76.
by ryankemper 6y ago
What role do you feel private citizens should take in discussing public policy? I agree that my projections won't be as accurate as, say, the top modellers'. (BTW, I'm working on the next iteration of this article that will t
77.
by ryankemper 6y ago
I'll terminate this by being so pedantic that we cross over into non-pedanticism. Per descriptive linguistics ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_description ), the assertion that it's wrong to start a s
78.
by ryankemper 6y ago
I don't have anything substantive for right now, but just wanted to say that I've gotten a lot of value out of your responses in this thread and really appreciate you taking the time to do so.
79.
by ryankemper 6y ago
Circling back: https://gitlab.com/ryankemper/writings/-/commit/6daa56a4a05f...
80.
by ryankemper 6y ago
Ah, I see. You are completely right. Thanks for pointing that out.
81.
by ryankemper 6y ago
Okay, I half concede your point. I expressed the desire to have holes poked in my top-level comment contextualizing HN submission / thread comments itself, but did not make clear reference to it in the document itself. So the external
82.
by ryankemper 6y ago
By massive excess I was referring to vents/tents. Estimates of vents needed were far too high due to the models being relied upon (i.e. not because we surprised ourselves with how flat the curve got given the seroprevalence was not exp
83.
by ryankemper 6y ago
Thus why I don't engage in gatekeeping. I'm just pointing out the obvious hole in your view. There's no hole in my view because I believe that experts are right more often than not, but I also believe that they can get things
84.
by ryankemper 6y ago
> This is what a large number of domain experts (including data scientists with domain knowledge) have been doing, and they believe the lockdown has been necessary (and will continue to be, at least in part). I believe you, but can you c
85.
by ryankemper 6y ago
I see, I think my point of contention was that it's not accurate to say that these are necessarily undercounted covid deaths. That hasn't been proven. I do agree however that it is very likely that the majority are. > Also, tho
86.
by ryankemper 6y ago
I'm going to hold up on responding to the points about unfalsifiability for now and focus on addressing this part: > Obviously, we can't lock the entire civilization down forever, and nobody has made such an argument - there wi
87.
by ryankemper 6y ago
As you can tell, I read everyone's feedback. I don't share your views on this matter. I think, particularly given that public policy is relevant to all of us, that it does make sense for even a layperson to engage in the conversat
88.
by ryankemper 6y ago
Precisely this, I define lockdown as the forced closure of businesses, public parks, beaches, etc. Telling people "we recommend physically distancing and wearing masks" does not qualify as lockdown. I hope that I made that clear i
89.
by ryankemper 6y ago
> without making an effort to get their ideas validated by people Me posting this is literally me doing that, so your visible irritation is very oddly placed.
90.
by ryankemper 6y ago
> Credentials are not the only way to acquire or demonstrate expertise. You say you are a "dude that likes to read research papers", how many epidemiological research papers have you read? How much time have you spent discussin

More ›