politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PB Nighthawks Cafe on the evening Trump said that he’d been tr

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » PB Nighthawks Cafe on the evening Trump said that he’d been treated worse than Abraham Lincoln – who, of course, was assassinated

We haven’t spent much time of late looking at some of the wacko things that Trump comes out with. The latest is an assertion that he has been treated worse than Abraham Lincoln. The obvious response is that Lincoln was murdered. What could be worse than that?

Read the full story here

squareroot2

First maybe???

Philip_Thompson

Second like Empire Strikes Back

dixiedean

Second. Like Trump is November.
I live in hope.

Sandpit

Apart from that, Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?

Philip_Thompson

dixiedean said:

Second. Like Trump is November.
I live in hope.

A new hope?

MyBurningEars

Surprisingly on topic, here is one of the most extraordinary pieces of television ever recorded:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RPoymt3Jx4

TheScreamingEagles

President Garfield was the worst treated President, literally.

Shot and for the next eleven weeks treated by incompetent doctors who liked sticking their unsterilised fingers in his wounds.

Unsurprisingly he died from such bad treatment, eleven weeks after the assasination attempt.

geoffw

FPT

Stuartinromford said:

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

That's the flaw though. Going back to an earlier conversation in this header, Norway won't go back to 3. Low key stuff (handwashing, not having massive sporting events) is enough to keep R to 1.something small.

Now any R greater than 1 is bad news, because it's still exponential growth which eventually goes huge. But if you must have that, you're better off doing it from a low baseline and with fewer deaths on the scorecard already. And the longer you delay the reckoning, the more likely it is that science will be able to save you.

The nub of Sweden versus the rest is a gamble on the date of an effective vaccine appearing. If one appears soon (i.e. before 2021) then the Swedes will have lost the gamble in terms of fatalities. But they would still have a less damaged economy. OTOH if a vaccine is a long time, or even never, to arrive then the Swedes will be seen to have made the right judgement as their overall health damage will not be much different from that of the others while they still have much less damage to their economy.

Scott_xP

https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1257406906236317699

MarqueeMark

geoffw said:

FPT

Stuartinromford said:

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

That's the flaw though. Going back to an earlier conversation in this header, Norway won't go back to 3. Low key stuff (handwashing, not having massive sporting events) is enough to keep R to 1.something small.

Now any R greater than 1 is bad news, because it's still exponential growth which eventually goes huge. But if you must have that, you're better off doing it from a low baseline and with fewer deaths on the scorecard already. And the longer you delay the reckoning, the more likely it is that science will be able to save you.

The nub of Sweden versus the rest is a gamble on the date of an effective vaccine appearing. If one appears soon (i.e. before 2021) then the Swedes will have lost the gamble in terms of fatalities. But they would still have a less damaged economy. OTOH if a vaccine is a long time, or even never, to arrive then the Swedes will be seen to have made the right judgement as their overall health damage will not be much different from that of the others while they still have much less damage to their economy.

That depends on whether the rest of the word gives them the cold shoulder for being smug gits about Covid.

OllyT

geoffw said:

FPT

Stuartinromford said:

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

That's the flaw though. Going back to an earlier conversation in this header, Norway won't go back to 3. Low key stuff (handwashing, not having massive sporting events) is enough to keep R to 1.something small.

Now any R greater than 1 is bad news, because it's still exponential growth which eventually goes huge. But if you must have that, you're better off doing it from a low baseline and with fewer deaths on the scorecard already. And the longer you delay the reckoning, the more likely it is that science will be able to save you.

The nub of Sweden versus the rest is a gamble on the date of an effective vaccine appearing. If one appears soon (i.e. before 2021) then the Swedes will have lost the gamble in terms of fatalities. But they would still have a less damaged economy. OTOH if a vaccine is a long time, or even never, to arrive then the Swedes will be seen to have made the right judgement as their overall health damage will not be much different from that of the others while they still have much less damage to their economy.

Do we actually know that the Swedes will have "a less damaged economy" or is that just an assumption?

EPG

Sweden got unlucky by being hit by COVID in elder care homes during wave 1. Some other countries with lockdowns were also hit, while some (including their closest neighbours) got lucky by avoiding it in wave 1. But now the lockdowns are ending, they have to get lucky again, and every time.

geoffw

OllyT said:

geoffw said:

FPT

Stuartinromford said:

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

That's the flaw though. Going back to an earlier conversation in this header, Norway won't go back to 3. Low key stuff (handwashing, not having massive sporting events) is enough to keep R to 1.something small.

Now any R greater than 1 is bad news, because it's still exponential growth which eventually goes huge. But if you must have that, you're better off doing it from a low baseline and with fewer deaths on the scorecard already. And the longer you delay the reckoning, the more likely it is that science will be able to save you.

The nub of Sweden versus the rest is a gamble on the date of an effective vaccine appearing. If one appears soon (i.e. before 2021) then the Swedes will have lost the gamble in terms of fatalities. But they would still have a less damaged economy. OTOH if a vaccine is a long time, or even never, to arrive then the Swedes will be seen to have made the right judgement as their overall health damage will not be much different from that of the others while they still have much less damage to their economy.

Do we actually know that the Swedes will have "a less damaged economy" or is that just an assumption?

Anything about the future is conjecture, but we do know that as of now they have a less damaged economy, and less "scarring" to use the current jargon.

MyBurningEars

geoffw said:

FPT

Stuartinromford said:

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

That's the flaw though. Going back to an earlier conversation in this header, Norway won't go back to 3. Low key stuff (handwashing, not having massive sporting events) is enough to keep R to 1.something small.

Now any R greater than 1 is bad news, because it's still exponential growth which eventually goes huge. But if you must have that, you're better off doing it from a low baseline and with fewer deaths on the scorecard already. And the longer you delay the reckoning, the more likely it is that science will be able to save you.

The nub of Sweden versus the rest is a gamble on the date of an effective vaccine appearing. If one appears soon (i.e. before 2021) then the Swedes will have lost the gamble in terms of fatalities. But they would still have a less damaged economy. OTOH if a vaccine is a long time, or even never, to arrive then the Swedes will be seen to have made the right judgement as their overall health damage will not be much different from that of the others while they still have much less damage to their economy.

Accepting that there are some "big ifs" here already, I'd add the proviso that in the no-vaccine scenario, the Swedes will still only be seen to have made the right choice if they avoid the kind of "unnecessary" deaths that come from overloading their healthcare system, i.e. people who would have likely lived if they had been able to get suitable medical treatment but were unable to because the peak caseload was too high. A quantity that even retrospectively will be very hard to measure, mind you. (So if it's sufficiently small, it may be difficult to distinguish from statistical noise. Also it may be deemed that such deaths are "worthwhile" as the price for lower economic damage, with the perspective that economic harm ultimately produces long-run health and social harm too.)

I think countries like NZ which have taken the approach of trying to wipe the virus out entirely and quarantine the entire nation from it, are going to face some extremely difficult decisions in the months to come if either no vaccine is forthcoming or its efficacy is insufficient for the population to reach herd immunity.

BigRich

Why I think that Swedens no-Lock-down' approach will probably have less overall deaths.

Im going to try to make this sort ish, There are lots of caviats, and so on im going to skip over in the quest for brevaty but will reply if people are intested.

Two roads to heard immunity.


Swedish is split at the movement the virus is retreating in Stockholm and the surrounding county, but growing in most of the rest of the nation. theses two combine to give a overall R of below but very close to 1. The althoratys in Sweden think that 25% of the city has had the virus.

In NYC a recent anti virus study suggested that 24.7% of NYC have also been infected,

On the day that the anti virus test was done in NYC 0.11% of the population had died. by contrast in Stockholm it was 0.06% roughly half.

Looking at the death fingers from any contrary, but Ill use the UK, 157 people under 20 have died but over 10,000 of the over 80 cohort. How many people die is as strongly related to who (by age) gets the virus as any mesher. if you could work out how to get to 'heard immunity' levels by only young and healthy people getting the virus you could get though this with only a limited number of deaths.

There is no magic bullet that will do that for you, but by doing things like keeping bars open, where lots of young people go. and recommending old and sick people stay at home as much as possible, you can shift the dynamic sufficiently to make a big difference. if you confine everybody equally then it will spread equally in all demographics, there for lots of old people will get it and die.

I'm going to predict that Sweden will when this is all over have less deaths and not have trashed its economy. but facts will only be truly comparable in perhaps 12-18 months.

I'm going with the premise that a vaccine is over 6 months away and that lock-downs can not be sustained that long. and track and trace apps will be a delaying factor not a game changer. Therefor I suspect that heard immunity is going to have to be the thing that ultimately beets the virus, not all will agree and yes New Zealand looks to have done it without but is now stuck unable to open its boarders.

tyson

OllyT said:

geoffw said:

FPT

Stuartinromford said:

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

That's the flaw though. Going back to an earlier conversation in this header, Norway won't go back to 3. Low key stuff (handwashing, not having massive sporting events) is enough to keep R to 1.something small.

Now any R greater than 1 is bad news, because it's still exponential growth which eventually goes huge. But if you must have that, you're better off doing it from a low baseline and with fewer deaths on the scorecard already. And the longer you delay the reckoning, the more likely it is that science will be able to save you.

The nub of Sweden versus the rest is a gamble on the date of an effective vaccine appearing. If one appears soon (i.e. before 2021) then the Swedes will have lost the gamble in terms of fatalities. But they would still have a less damaged economy. OTOH if a vaccine is a long time, or even never, to arrive then the Swedes will be seen to have made the right judgement as their overall health damage will not be much different from that of the others while they still have much less damage to their economy.

Do we actually know that the Swedes will have "a less damaged economy" or is that just an assumption?

It is a load of nonsense....

Our economy is going to be fubared because it is service sector driven...Italy because of it's reliance on tourism....and so and so on....

squareroot2

BigRich said:

Why I think that Swedens no-Lock-down' approach will probably have less overall deaths.

Im going to try to make this sort ish, There are lots of caviats, and so on im going to skip over in the quest for brevaty but will reply if people are intested.

Two roads to heard immunity.


Swedish is split at the movement the virus is retreating in Stockholm and the surrounding county, but growing in most of the rest of the nation. theses two combine to give a overall R of below but very close to 1. The althoratys in Sweden think that 25% of the city has had the virus.

In NYC a recent anti virus study suggested that 24.7% of NYC have also been infected,

On the day that the anti virus test was done in NYC 0.11% of the population had died. by contrast in Stockholm it was 0.06% roughly half.

Looking at the death fingers from any contrary, but Ill use the UK, 157 people under 20 have died but over 10,000 of the over 80 cohort. How many people die is as strongly related to who (by age) gets the virus as any mesher. if you could work out how to get to 'heard immunity' levels by only young and healthy people getting the virus you could get though this with only a limited number of deaths.

There is no magic bullet that will do that for you, but by doing things like keeping bars open, where lots of young people go. and recommending old and sick people stay at home as much as possible, you can shift the dynamic sufficiently to make a big difference. if you confine everybody equally then it will spread equally in all demographics, there for lots of old people will get it and die.

I'm going to predict that Sweden will when this is all over have less deaths and not have trashed its economy. but facts will only be truly comparable in perhaps 12-18 months.

I'm going with the premise that a vaccine is over 6 months away and that lock-downs can not be sustained that long. and track and trace apps will be a delaying factor not a game changer. Therefor I suspect that heard immunity is going to have to be the thing that ultimately beets the virus, not all will agree and yes New Zealand looks to have done it without but is now stuck unable to open its boarders.

#grammar police

FEWER overall deaths....

BigRich

OllyT said:

geoffw said:

FPT

Stuartinromford said:

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

That's the flaw though. Going back to an earlier conversation in this header, Norway won't go back to 3. Low key stuff (handwashing, not having massive sporting events) is enough to keep R to 1.something small.

Now any R greater than 1 is bad news, because it's still exponential growth which eventually goes huge. But if you must have that, you're better off doing it from a low baseline and with fewer deaths on the scorecard already. And the longer you delay the reckoning, the more likely it is that science will be able to save you.

The nub of Sweden versus the rest is a gamble on the date of an effective vaccine appearing. If one appears soon (i.e. before 2021) then the Swedes will have lost the gamble in terms of fatalities. But they would still have a less damaged economy. OTOH if a vaccine is a long time, or even never, to arrive then the Swedes will be seen to have made the right judgement as their overall health damage will not be much different from that of the others while they still have much less damage to their economy.

Do we actually know that the Swedes will have "a less damaged economy" or is that just an assumption?

I feel confidant to say that their economy will be less damaged than it would if it had taken other approach, even if we are just talking about government borrowing to pay unemployment benefits. however it is a very trade dependant economy with lots of imports and exports, and will there for be badly effected regardless, which will make comparisons hard.

geoffw

MarqueeMark said:

geoffw said:

FPT

Stuartinromford said:

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

That's the flaw though. Going back to an earlier conversation in this header, Norway won't go back to 3. Low key stuff (handwashing, not having massive sporting events) is enough to keep R to 1.something small.

Now any R greater than 1 is bad news, because it's still exponential growth which eventually goes huge. But if you must have that, you're better off doing it from a low baseline and with fewer deaths on the scorecard already. And the longer you delay the reckoning, the more likely it is that science will be able to save you.

The nub of Sweden versus the rest is a gamble on the date of an effective vaccine appearing. If one appears soon (i.e. before 2021) then the Swedes will have lost the gamble in terms of fatalities. But they would still have a less damaged economy. OTOH if a vaccine is a long time, or even never, to arrive then the Swedes will be seen to have made the right judgement as their overall health damage will not be much different from that of the others while they still have much less damage to their economy.

That depends on whether the rest of the word gives them the cold shoulder for being smug gits about Covid.

I think their stance reflects their well known national pessimism: they do not believe in the prospect of an early vaccine. We on the other hand are led by a dyed-in-the-wool optimist and we're putting plenty of dosh into finding a vaccine.

Toms

MyBurningEars said:

Surprisingly on topic, here is one of the most extraordinary pieces of television ever recorded:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RPoymt3Jx4

My father's father was born in 1867, two years after Lincoln's assassination.

Sunil_Prasannan

TheScreamingEagles said:

President Garfield was the worst treated President, literally.

Shot and for the next eleven weeks treated by incompetent doctors who liked sticking their unsterilised fingers in his wounds.

Unsurprisingly he died from such bad treatment, eleven weeks after the assasination attempt.

President Garfield? Did he like lasagne?

Sunil_Prasannan

Philip_Thompson said:

dixiedean said:

Second. Like Trump is November.
I live in hope.

A new hope?

Hey, Philip. May the Fourth be with you!

DecrepiterJohnL

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1257406906236317699

Something from the Telegraph story, tangential yet significant.
Robert O'Brien, the US national security adviser and successor to John Bolton who heads up the NSC, did not hide his disapproval at Britain's decision during a radio interview in January.

He likened the UK letting Huawei build its 5G network to allowing “the Communist Party of China to have access to their health care records and their tweets and their social media and their bank records”.

Of course HMG (and its predecessors of both parties) sees nothing wrong in handing over Britons' medical or financial data to foreign states. One wonders what they think spies do; perhaps their minds are addled by too much James Bond.

MarqueeMark

geoffw said:

MarqueeMark said:

geoffw said:

FPT

Stuartinromford said:

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

That's the flaw though. Going back to an earlier conversation in this header, Norway won't go back to 3. Low key stuff (handwashing, not having massive sporting events) is enough to keep R to 1.something small.

Now any R greater than 1 is bad news, because it's still exponential growth which eventually goes huge. But if you must have that, you're better off doing it from a low baseline and with fewer deaths on the scorecard already. And the longer you delay the reckoning, the more likely it is that science will be able to save you.

The nub of Sweden versus the rest is a gamble on the date of an effective vaccine appearing. If one appears soon (i.e. before 2021) then the Swedes will have lost the gamble in terms of fatalities. But they would still have a less damaged economy. OTOH if a vaccine is a long time, or even never, to arrive then the Swedes will be seen to have made the right judgement as their overall health damage will not be much different from that of the others while they still have much less damage to their economy.

That depends on whether the rest of the word gives them the cold shoulder for being smug gits about Covid.

I think their stance reflects their well known national pessimism: they do not believe in the prospect of an early vaccine. We on the other hand are led by a dyed-in-the-wool optimist and we're putting plenty of dosh into finding a vaccine.

The Swedes will all be wearing a very un-Swedish mile-wide smile if we do develop that vaccine.

Sunil_Prasannan

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

geoffw

MarqueeMark said:

geoffw said:

MarqueeMark said:

geoffw said:

FPT

Stuartinromford said:

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

That's the flaw though. Going back to an earlier conversation in this header, Norway won't go back to 3. Low key stuff (handwashing, not having massive sporting events) is enough to keep R to 1.something small.

Now any R greater than 1 is bad news, because it's still exponential growth which eventually goes huge. But if you must have that, you're better off doing it from a low baseline and with fewer deaths on the scorecard already. And the longer you delay the reckoning, the more likely it is that science will be able to save you.

The nub of Sweden versus the rest is a gamble on the date of an effective vaccine appearing. If one appears soon (i.e. before 2021) then the Swedes will have lost the gamble in terms of fatalities. But they would still have a less damaged economy. OTOH if a vaccine is a long time, or even never, to arrive then the Swedes will be seen to have made the right judgement as their overall health damage will not be much different from that of the others while they still have much less damage to their economy.

That depends on whether the rest of the word gives them the cold shoulder for being smug gits about Covid.

I think their stance reflects their well known national pessimism: they do not believe in the prospect of an early vaccine. We on the other hand are led by a dyed-in-the-wool optimist and we're putting plenty of dosh into finding a vaccine.

The Swedes will all be wearing a very un-Swedish mile-wide smile if we do develop that vaccine.

As you observed, smugness is another of their characteristics.

MarqueeMark

*sigh*

Just rejoice at that news.....

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-52536995

BigRich

squareroot2 said:

BigRich said:

Why I think that Swedens no-Lock-down' approach will probably have less overall deaths.

Im going to try to make this sort ish, There are lots of caviats, and so on im going to skip over in the quest for brevaty but will reply if people are intested.

Two roads to heard immunity.


Swedish is split at the movement the virus is retreating in Stockholm and the surrounding county, but growing in most of the rest of the nation. theses two combine to give a overall R of below but very close to 1. The althoratys in Sweden think that 25% of the city has had the virus.

In NYC a recent anti virus study suggested that 24.7% of NYC have also been infected,

On the day that the anti virus test was done in NYC 0.11% of the population had died. by contrast in Stockholm it was 0.06% roughly half.

Looking at the death fingers from any contrary, but Ill use the UK, 157 people under 20 have died but over 10,000 of the over 80 cohort. How many people die is as strongly related to who (by age) gets the virus as any mesher. if you could work out how to get to 'heard immunity' levels by only young and healthy people getting the virus you could get though this with only a limited number of deaths.

There is no magic bullet that will do that for you, but by doing things like keeping bars open, where lots of young people go. and recommending old and sick people stay at home as much as possible, you can shift the dynamic sufficiently to make a big difference. if you confine everybody equally then it will spread equally in all demographics, there for lots of old people will get it and die.

I'm going to predict that Sweden will when this is all over have less deaths and not have trashed its economy. but facts will only be truly comparable in perhaps 12-18 months.

I'm going with the premise that a vaccine is over 6 months away and that lock-downs can not be sustained that long. and track and trace apps will be a delaying factor not a game changer. Therefor I suspect that heard immunity is going to have to be the thing that ultimately beets the virus, not all will agree and yes New Zealand looks to have done it without but is now stuck unable to open its boarders.

#grammar police

FEWER overall deaths....

Sorry, can I blame poor grammar on Dyslexia?

DecrepiterJohnL

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

Next working day delivery. What are you complaining about?

DecrepiterJohnL

Deleted

MarqueeMark

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

Ultra-high-temperature cows need the weekend off, or they spontaneously combust.

Quincel

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

I ordered a replacement vacuum cleaner yesterday. Currys said that if I didn't pay for named day delivery then basic (free) delivery would come on roughly 11 May. Then they emailed today that it's coming tomorrow. Sweet!

MyBurningEars

BigRich said:

squareroot2 said:

BigRich said:

Why I think that Swedens no-Lock-down' approach will probably have less overall deaths.

Im going to try to make this sort ish, There are lots of caviats, and so on im going to skip over in the quest for brevaty but will reply if people are intested.

Two roads to heard immunity.


Swedish is split at the movement the virus is retreating in Stockholm and the surrounding county, but growing in most of the rest of the nation. theses two combine to give a overall R of below but very close to 1. The althoratys in Sweden think that 25% of the city has had the virus.

In NYC a recent anti virus study suggested that 24.7% of NYC have also been infected,

On the day that the anti virus test was done in NYC 0.11% of the population had died. by contrast in Stockholm it was 0.06% roughly half.

Looking at the death fingers from any contrary, but Ill use the UK, 157 people under 20 have died but over 10,000 of the over 80 cohort. How many people die is as strongly related to who (by age) gets the virus as any mesher. if you could work out how to get to 'heard immunity' levels by only young and healthy people getting the virus you could get though this with only a limited number of deaths.

There is no magic bullet that will do that for you, but by doing things like keeping bars open, where lots of young people go. and recommending old and sick people stay at home as much as possible, you can shift the dynamic sufficiently to make a big difference. if you confine everybody equally then it will spread equally in all demographics, there for lots of old people will get it and die.

I'm going to predict that Sweden will when this is all over have less deaths and not have trashed its economy. but facts will only be truly comparable in perhaps 12-18 months.

I'm going with the premise that a vaccine is over 6 months away and that lock-downs can not be sustained that long. and track and trace apps will be a delaying factor not a game changer. Therefor I suspect that heard immunity is going to have to be the thing that ultimately beets the virus, not all will agree and yes New Zealand looks to have done it without but is now stuck unable to open its boarders.

#grammar police

FEWER overall deaths....

Sorry, can I blame poor grammar on Dyslexia?

I reckon the less/fewer thing is hypercorrection, personally. Alfred the Great used "less" for countable nouns, and if it was good enough for him, it's good enough for me. The idea that one should use "fewer" instead of "less" for countable nouns doesn't seem to have come into being until the late 18th century. Moreover, from a descriptive rather than prescriptive point of view, "less" is very often used where hardliners would prefer "fewer". So this may be a rule on the way out anyway, and I suggest you keep ploughing along with your current usage until there are less pedants who insist upon it.

squareroot2

Quincel said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

I ordered a replacement vacuum cleaner yesterday. Currys said that if I didn't pay for named day delivery then basic (free) delivery would come on roughly 11 May. Then they emailed today that it's coming tomorrow. Sweet!

John Lewis just as good often with better warranty.

rottenborough

https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1257411918135992321/photo/1

Floater

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1257411918135992321/photo/1

Corbyn won the argument

Jonathan

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1257411918135992321/photo/1

That’s an impressive stat.

MyBurningEars

Least reassuring news of the week:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52532435

Apple, Google and hundreds of privacy advocates have raised concerns that this risks hackers or even the state itself being able to re-identify anonymised users, and thus learn details about their social circles.

But NHSX has consulted ethicists and GCHQ's National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) on the matter, and believes safeguards are in place to minimise the risk of this happening.

Yup, it's a good thing that no branch of government has any inclination whatsoever towards tracking the locations and network of social contacts of people of interest, let's just confirm that by getting GCHQ to say it all seems legit to them...

Honestly whoever wrote that press release would have done better not to mention GCHQ at all!

FF43

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

Lockdown does two things for you. It allows you to get control over the epidemic, reduce the infection rate and minimise the death toll. It buys you time to put into place other less blunt and economically damaging mitigation.

The long term hope has to be a vaccine.. In the medium term we are looking at continued social distancing and more effective quarantine of the type in Korea and elsewhere. We don't beat the virus but we learn to live with it through discipline and high hygiene standards.

Problem when you go for a balanced not too high death toll, not too much economic damage approach is that you get a still large death toll without doing anything on the economic damage front. In that case you are better off focusing on getting the death rate and infections down to a trickle so your economy is no longer hobbled by the epidemic. And you also save many lives.

Floater

Sunil_Prasannan said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

President Garfield was the worst treated President, literally.

Shot and for the next eleven weeks treated by incompetent doctors who liked sticking their unsterilised fingers in his wounds.

Unsurprisingly he died from such bad treatment, eleven weeks after the assasination attempt.

President Garfield? Did he like lasagne?

Rumour has it he liked pineapple on pizza.

Sunil_Prasannan

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

Next working day delivery. What are you complaining about?

Not complaining at all! When I ordered, they said "arriving on or by Saturday 16th"!

glw

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Scott_xP said:

https://twitter.com/benrileysmith/status/1257406906236317699

Something from the Telegraph story, tangential yet significant.
Robert O'Brien, the US national security adviser and successor to John Bolton who heads up the NSC, did not hide his disapproval at Britain's decision during a radio interview in January.

He likened the UK letting Huawei build its 5G network to allowing “the Communist Party of China to have access to their health care records and their tweets and their social media and their bank records”.

Of course HMG (and its predecessors of both parties) sees nothing wrong in handing over Britons' medical or financial data to foreign states. One wonders what they think spies do; perhaps their minds are addled by too much James Bond.

The US arguments on this issue are spurious and mostly illogical. Take the social media comment for starters. Social media is either public (in which case Huawei's network equipment is irrelevant) or it's invariably encrypted in a way that the same US government complains is leaving their signals intelligence programmes in the dark (so again the Huawei network equipment is irrelevant).

The US government is saying "the Chinese will spy on everything you do" AND simultaneously complaining "we in the US can no longer spy on everything you do".


I'm 95% certain that the real beef the US has is that they can't lean on Huawei, or easily recruit agents in the company, the way they do with western companies.

The NCSC has already reported on this issue and made a hell of a lot more sense than anything coming from the US government or the Tory backbenches.

Jonathan

It is clear that income tax is not going to pay for this.

rottenborough

MyBurningEars said:

Least reassuring news of the week:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52532435

Apple, Google and hundreds of privacy advocates have raised concerns that this risks hackers or even the state itself being able to re-identify anonymised users, and thus learn details about their social circles.

But NHSX has consulted ethicists and GCHQ's National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) on the matter, and believes safeguards are in place to minimise the risk of this happening.

Yup, it's a good thing that no branch of government has any inclination whatsoever towards tracking the locations and network of social contacts of people of interest, let's just confirm that by getting GCHQ to say it all seems legit to them...

Honestly whoever wrote that press release would have done better not to mention GCHQ at all!

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

rpjs

Quincel said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

I ordered a replacement vacuum cleaner yesterday. Currys said that if I didn't pay for named day delivery then basic (free) delivery would come on roughly 11 May. Then they emailed today that it's coming tomorrow. Sweet!

I recently ordered some clothes from L L Bean (yes, I *do* drive a Subaru, why do you ask?).
I could either have regular delivery for free, guaranteed to arrive by May 6th, or pay $16.99 for expedited delivery, also guaranteed to arrive by May 6th. I chose free delivery and it arrived May 1st!

williamglenn

Nige gets his collar felt.

https://twitter.com/Nigel_Farage/status/1257417176061001741

squareroot2

Jonathan said:

It is clear that income tax is not going to pay for this.

Income tax used to.be 33p in.the pound..

Jonathan

squareroot2 said:

Jonathan said:

It is clear that income tax is not going to pay for this.

Income tax used to.be 33p in.the pound..

If the majority are not working, it ain’t going to raise much.

AlastairMeeks

Morrissey would sympathise: “now I know how Joan of Arc felt”.

The name of the song is apt too.

glw

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

eek

squareroot2 said:

Quincel said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

I ordered a replacement vacuum cleaner yesterday. Currys said that if I didn't pay for named day delivery then basic (free) delivery would come on roughly 11 May. Then they emailed today that it's coming tomorrow. Sweet!

John Lewis just as good often with better warranty.

John Lewis was more expensive when I bought a replacement hoover a fortnight ago (a Henry as the Dyson it replaced was beyond useless). Yes I could have asked them to price match but I'm fed up with John Lewis overcharging until being asked to do something that should be automatic.

Jonathan

We also already have marginal tax rates of 50 and 60%.

Sandpit

MyBurningEars said:

Least reassuring news of the week:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52532435

Apple, Google and hundreds of privacy advocates have raised concerns that this risks hackers or even the state itself being able to re-identify anonymised users, and thus learn details about their social circles.

But NHSX has consulted ethicists and GCHQ's National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) on the matter, and believes safeguards are in place to minimise the risk of this happening.

Yup, it's a good thing that no branch of government has any inclination whatsoever towards tracking the locations and network of social contacts of people of interest, let's just confirm that by getting GCHQ to say it all seems legit to them...

Honestly whoever wrote that press release would have done better not to mention GCHQ at all!

They're setting themselves up for a big fail here, especially so when they're going out of their way not to implement the international standard that a lot of other countries will be using.

They need to make sure they test it thoroughly before rolling out, and it needs to be made entirely voluntary - the law must prohibit local authorities and private companies from attempting to make its use a condition of service or employment.

Oh, and work in parallel on the Apple/Google tracking app too - it may end up being very useful!

squareroot2

eek said:

squareroot2 said:

Quincel said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

I ordered a replacement vacuum cleaner yesterday. Currys said that if I didn't pay for named day delivery then basic (free) delivery would come on roughly 11 May. Then they emailed today that it's coming tomorrow. Sweet!

John Lewis just as good often with better warranty.

John Lewis was more expensive when I bought a replacement hoover a fortnight ago (a Henry as the Dyson it replaced was beyond useless). Yes I could have asked them to price match but I'm fed up with John Lewis overcharging until being asked to do something that should be automatic.

Lol we bought a henry from J Lewis. Its great!

Its all a matter or opinion. Dysons are very overpriced and tge suction power is limited by EU law afaik

MarqueeMark

Jonathan said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1257411918135992321/photo/1

That’s an impressive stat.

Lockdown rules for the over-70s set to be relaxed from those rules only the press thought applied anyway.

So the Telegraph's big story is "No change to over-70s lockdown rules"!

AlastairMeeks

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

That people don’t understand how much data they are sharing is hardly an argument against opposing the state joining in the plundering.

FF43

OllyT said:

geoffw said:

FPT

Stuartinromford said:

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

That's the flaw though. Going back to an earlier conversation in this header, Norway won't go back to 3. Low key stuff (handwashing, not having massive sporting events) is enough to keep R to 1.something small.

Now any R greater than 1 is bad news, because it's still exponential growth which eventually goes huge. But if you must have that, you're better off doing it from a low baseline and with fewer deaths on the scorecard already. And the longer you delay the reckoning, the more likely it is that science will be able to save you.

The nub of Sweden versus the rest is a gamble on the date of an effective vaccine appearing. If one appears soon (i.e. before 2021) then the Swedes will have lost the gamble in terms of fatalities. But they would still have a less damaged economy. OTOH if a vaccine is a long time, or even never, to arrive then the Swedes will be seen to have made the right judgement as their overall health damage will not be much different from that of the others while they still have much less damage to their economy.

Do we actually know that the Swedes will have "a less damaged economy" or is that just an assumption?

A bit less damaged now probably, but countries can do a lot more if they are essentially free of the virus. People also have more confidence if they feel safe. We can see that in Asian countries that are continuing to function better than their European counterparts. I think you're better focusing on getting the infection and death rate down. You also save lives.

squareroot2

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

That people don’t understand how much data they are sharing is hardly an argument against opposing the state joining in the plundering.

If the info garnered is srambled and therefore the individual cannot be identified in person I do not see the problem. I will use the app. That is a given AFAIC.

Foxy

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

That people don’t understand how much data they are sharing is hardly an argument against opposing the state joining in the plundering.

Some of the night staff in my Mother in Laws nursing home on the Isle of Wight have come down with Covid-19. Testing and contact tracing there, in the nick of time by my book.

TGOHF666

Jonathan said:

It is clear that income tax is not going to pay for this.

Not yours. Your grandchildren’s perhaps.

Philip_Thompson

squareroot2 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

That people don’t understand how much data they are sharing is hardly an argument against opposing the state joining in the plundering.

If the info garnered is srambled and therefore the individual cannot be identified in person I do not see the problem. I will use the app. That is a given AFAIC.

Especially since you can later uninstall the app and you can always disable bluetooth whenever you please. The government can already triangulate your position. Sharing contacts for a few weeks using a voluntary app that you can disable at any time doesn't seem like a major invasion to me.

Jonathan

TGOHF666 said:

Jonathan said:

It is clear that income tax is not going to pay for this.

Not yours. Your grandchildren’s perhaps.

Who are they paying back?

Philip_Thompson

TGOHF666 said:

Jonathan said:

It is clear that income tax is not going to pay for this.

Not yours. Your grandchildren’s perhaps.

Nobodies will pay for it. We'll pay for its interest in perpetuity.

glw

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

That people don’t understand how much data they are sharing is hardly an argument against opposing the state joining in the plundering.

Given that the state already data mines social media and many other large data sets, collects almost all call record data (which gives up your location all on its own), and has some massive interception programmes for general internet traffic I don't think they'll be learning much they didn't already know from of a contact tracing app.

kle4

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

What a bunch of fools. I only share personal details with people who share a deviant interest in political minutiae, who dare not admit such perversion in real life, I should think, thus ensuring it is very secure.

FF43

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

That people don’t understand how much data they are sharing is hardly an argument against opposing the state joining in the plundering.

You're right to be worried. Problem, this thing's got to work.

We really have the wrong people in government right now.

TGOHF666

Jonathan said:

TGOHF666 said:

Jonathan said:

It is clear that income tax is not going to pay for this.

Not yours. Your grandchildren’s perhaps.

Who are they paying back?

Whoever buys bonds.

kle4

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

That people don’t understand how much data they are sharing is hardly an argument against opposing the state joining in the plundering.

Indeed, that people generally do not know such things is an additional reason there need to be protections generally, and very careful moves if there is felt to be a need.

MarqueeMark

squareroot2 said:

eek said:

squareroot2 said:

Quincel said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

I ordered a replacement vacuum cleaner yesterday. Currys said that if I didn't pay for named day delivery then basic (free) delivery would come on roughly 11 May. Then they emailed today that it's coming tomorrow. Sweet!

John Lewis just as good often with better warranty.

John Lewis was more expensive when I bought a replacement hoover a fortnight ago (a Henry as the Dyson it replaced was beyond useless). Yes I could have asked them to price match but I'm fed up with John Lewis overcharging until being asked to do something that should be automatic.

Lol we bought a henry from J Lewis. Its great!

Its all a matter or opinion. Dysons are very overpriced and tge suction power is limited by EU law afaik

Brexit means having hoovers that can suck your floorboards through your carpet....

bookseller

Philip_Thompson said:

squareroot2 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

That people don’t understand how much data they are sharing is hardly an argument against opposing the state joining in the plundering.

If the info garnered is srambled and therefore the individual cannot be identified in person I do not see the problem. I will use the app. That is a given AFAIC.

Especially since you can later uninstall the app and you can always disable bluetooth whenever you please. The government can already triangulate your position. Sharing contacts for a few weeks using a voluntary app that you can disable at any time doesn't seem like a major invasion to me.

More people will object to having GPS and Bluetooth on cos those things drain the battery like nothing else...

TGOHF666

Philip_Thompson said:

squareroot2 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast number Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

app right now.

joining in the plundering.

and therefore the individual cannot be identified in person I do not see the problem. I will use the app. That is a given AFAIC.

Especially since you can later uninstall the app and you can always disable bluetooth whenever you please. The government can already triangulate your position. Sharing contacts for a few weeks using a voluntary app that you can disable at any time doesn't seem like a major invasion to me.

Small beer compared with pubs being closed for months.

geoffw

BBC Scotland News: "The Scottish Government is also developing its own contact technology .. "
why does that not inspire me with absolute confidence, I wonder?

C'mon, let the experts, Google and Apple, do the job.

kle4

Philip_Thompson said:

TGOHF666 said:

Jonathan said:

It is clear that income tax is not going to pay for this.

Not yours. Your grandchildren’s perhaps.

Nobodies will pay for it. We'll pay for its interest in perpetuity.

We're just biding time until we can get to the moneyless society Star Trek promised us.

Jonathan

TGOHF666 said:

Jonathan said:

TGOHF666 said:

Jonathan said:

It is clear that income tax is not going to pay for this.

Not yours. Your grandchildren’s perhaps.

Who are they paying back?

Whoever buys bonds.

And who is that? The Chinese?

TGOHF666

People more concerned with their data than their elderly parents who they shipped off to homes to be out of the way because they smell a bit and cramp their style and limit foreign jollies.

DecrepiterJohnL

Sunil_Prasannan said:

DecrepiterJohnL said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

Next working day delivery. What are you complaining about?

Not complaining at all! When I ordered, they said "arriving on or by Saturday 16th"!

An online retailer's word is his bond.

Sandpit

bookseller said:

Philip_Thompson said:

squareroot2 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

That people don’t understand how much data they are sharing is hardly an argument against opposing the state joining in the plundering.

If the info garnered is srambled and therefore the individual cannot be identified in person I do not see the problem. I will use the app. That is a given AFAIC.

Especially since you can later uninstall the app and you can always disable bluetooth whenever you please. The government can already triangulate your position. Sharing contacts for a few weeks using a voluntary app that you can disable at any time doesn't seem like a major invasion to me.

More people will object to having GPS and Bluetooth on cos those things drain the battery like nothing else...

Not to mention many people who don't own the right type of phone (mostly very young, old and poor) or even own one at all.

Any attempt at compulsion will also generate a lot of conscientious objectors among privacy activists, who will happily tie up the government in legal knots to prevent the crisis being used as a state grab of personal data.

Floater

Foxy said:

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

That people don’t understand how much data they are sharing is hardly an argument against opposing the state joining in the plundering.

Some of the night staff in my Mother in Laws nursing home on the Isle of Wight have come down with Covid-19. Testing and contact tracing there, in the nick of time by my book.

Hope all will be well for her

Sunil_Prasannan

AlastairMeeks said:

Morrissey would sympathise: “now I know how Joan of Arc felt”.

The name of the song is apt too.

Joan of Arc was OMD.

Anabobazina

Bluetooth doesn’t suck much power nowadays.

The app is a sensible way of tracking and tracing, for those that want to get back out in the wild.

Those that don’t, don’t need to use it I guess!

Sunil_Prasannan

MarqueeMark said:

squareroot2 said:

eek said:

squareroot2 said:

Quincel said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

I ordered a replacement vacuum cleaner yesterday. Currys said that if I didn't pay for named day delivery then basic (free) delivery would come on roughly 11 May. Then they emailed today that it's coming tomorrow. Sweet!

John Lewis just as good often with better warranty.

John Lewis was more expensive when I bought a replacement hoover a fortnight ago (a Henry as the Dyson it replaced was beyond useless). Yes I could have asked them to price match but I'm fed up with John Lewis overcharging until being asked to do something that should be automatic.

Lol we bought a henry from J Lewis. Its great!

Its all a matter or opinion. Dysons are very overpriced and tge suction power is limited by EU law afaik

Brexit means having hoovers that can suck your floorboards through your carpet....

Vacuum cleaners really suck!

MarqueeMark

geoffw said:

BBC Scotland News: "The Scottish Government is also developing its own contact technology .. "

It's called a fist.

Mortimer

TGOHF666 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

squareroot2 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast number Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

app right now.

joining in the plundering.

and therefore the individual cannot be identified in person I do not see the problem. I will use the app. That is a given AFAIC.

Especially since you can later uninstall the app and you can always disable bluetooth whenever you please. The government can already triangulate your position. Sharing contacts for a few weeks using a voluntary app that you can disable at any time doesn't seem like a major invasion to me.

Small beer compared with pubs being closed for months.

I like a good pub.

But I am baffled by the moaning about them being closed.

They're a means to an end, surely? I can buy in better booze than most pubs, and cook as well as all but the top gastros.

MarqueeMark

Sunil_Prasannan said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Morrissey would sympathise: “now I know how Joan of Arc felt”.

The name of the song is apt too.

Joan of Arc was OMD.

Bigmouth Strikes Again was The Smiths.

JohnLilburne

bookseller said:

Philip_Thompson said:

squareroot2 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

That people don’t understand how much data they are sharing is hardly an argument against opposing the state joining in the plundering.

If the info garnered is srambled and therefore the individual cannot be identified in person I do not see the problem. I will use the app. That is a given AFAIC.

Especially since you can later uninstall the app and you can always disable bluetooth whenever you please. The government can already triangulate your position. Sharing contacts for a few weeks using a voluntary app that you can disable at any time doesn't seem like a major invasion to me.

More people will object to having GPS and Bluetooth on cos those things drain the battery like nothing else...

I leave both on by default and it seems to make very little difference

Foxy

TGOHF666 said:

People more concerned with their data than their elderly parents who they shipped off to homes to be out of the way because they smell a bit and cramp their style and limit foreign jollies.

Fuck off.

You have no idea about social care and the need for it.

Philip_Thompson

bookseller said:

Philip_Thompson said:

squareroot2 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast numbers of us seem prepared to tell Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

There are almost certainly thousands of people complaining on Facebook about the contact tracing app right now.

That people don’t understand how much data they are sharing is hardly an argument against opposing the state joining in the plundering.

If the info garnered is srambled and therefore the individual cannot be identified in person I do not see the problem. I will use the app. That is a given AFAIC.

Especially since you can later uninstall the app and you can always disable bluetooth whenever you please. The government can already triangulate your position. Sharing contacts for a few weeks using a voluntary app that you can disable at any time doesn't seem like a major invasion to me.

More people will object to having GPS and Bluetooth on cos those things drain the battery like nothing else...

This isn't the noughties. Bluetooth power efficiency is much better than it used to be. I almost always have my bluetooth on nowadays - have my watch, in-car stereo/hands-free kit, bathroom scales and headphones that connect to the phone via bluetooth, the watch pretty permanently so. Doesn't have much of an impact on battery life, time spent using the phone browsing the internet or playing games matters far more for battery life than devices.

williamglenn

MarqueeMark said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Morrissey would sympathise: “now I know how Joan of Arc felt”.

The name of the song is apt too.

Joan of Arc was OMD.

Bigmouth Strikes Again was The Smiths.

There's always someone, somewhere with a big nose who knows...

BigRich

Sunil_Prasannan said:

MarqueeMark said:

squareroot2 said:

eek said:

squareroot2 said:

Quincel said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Ordered some UHT milk online on Saturday, arrived this evening.

I ordered a replacement vacuum cleaner yesterday. Currys said that if I didn't pay for named day delivery then basic (free) delivery would come on roughly 11 May. Then they emailed today that it's coming tomorrow. Sweet!

John Lewis just as good often with better warranty.

John Lewis was more expensive when I bought a replacement hoover a fortnight ago (a Henry as the Dyson it replaced was beyond useless). Yes I could have asked them to price match but I'm fed up with John Lewis overcharging until being asked to do something that should be automatic.

Lol we bought a henry from J Lewis. Its great!

Its all a matter or opinion. Dysons are very overpriced and tge suction power is limited by EU law afaik

Brexit means having hoovers that can suck your floorboards through your carpet....

Vacuum cleaners really suck!

My wife bought a one of those robot vacuum cleansers in December, and we named it 'Boris' after the PM won the election.

To her its because Boris 'sucks'

To me its because he gets things done'

Philip_Thompson

MarqueeMark said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

AlastairMeeks said:

Morrissey would sympathise: “now I know how Joan of Arc felt”.

The name of the song is apt too.

Joan of Arc was OMD.

Bigmouth Strikes Again was The Smiths.

Great tune, could also double as the name for his* autobiography.

* Morrissey or Farage, take your pick.

not_on_fire

TGOHF666 said:

People more concerned with their data than their elderly parents who they shipped off to homes to be out of the way because they smell a bit and cramp their style and limit foreign jollies.

A late but convincing entry for most idiotic post of the day

Floater

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8285541/The-Stranglers-keyboard-player-Dave-Greenfield-dies-71-testing-positive-coronavirus.html

Jonathan

TGOHF666 said:

People more concerned with their data than their elderly parents who they shipped off to homes to be out of the way because they smell a bit and cramp their style and limit foreign jollies.

You seamlessly move into full arsehole territory.

Yokes

From the previous threads headline article.

1. The idea that if somehow Sars CoV 2 was a weapon it was a terrible failure. This is just plain wrong and has next to no merit. It'd have been rather good. I did go through the concept a week or two back on here of sub threshold strategies and weapons that are designed to cripple and damage but not invite (due to the nature of the damage or the uncertainty of the source) a proportionate response. Its a well known concept and is something that plague warriors have understood for decades.

2. We do not know either way how the virus got into the human population, we just don't, we have conjecture we have what sounds right and logical but we do not have certainty.

3. The China issue is less about whether they couldn't mop up properly in their BSL 4 labs but how much they told the world, how much they withheld, how much they may have actually fed positively false information, why they appear to be behind public disinformation efforts and how much they've lost the head when someone suggests their handling of it needs looking into.

4. Trump may be a first rate clown that automatically reduces the credibility of anything just by opening his mouth but do not assume everyone around him including the US & Western Intelligence agencies are all clowns as well.

Anabobazina

Mortimer said:

TGOHF666 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

squareroot2 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast number Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

app right now.

joining in the plundering.

and therefore the individual cannot be identified in person I do not see the problem. I will use the app. That is a given AFAIC.

Especially since you can later uninstall the app and you can always disable bluetooth whenever you please. The government can already triangulate your position. Sharing contacts for a few weeks using a voluntary app that you can disable at any time doesn't seem like a major invasion to me.

Small beer compared with pubs being closed for months.

I like a good pub.

But I am baffled by the moaning about them being closed.

They're a means to an end, surely? I can buy in better booze than most pubs, and cook as well as all but the top gastros.

Hmm. I don’t think you are really into pubs at all, are you?

Floater

Mortimer said:

TGOHF666 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

squareroot2 said:

AlastairMeeks said:

glw said:

rottenborough said:

Although vast number Facebook every detail of "details about their social circles."

app right now.

joining in the plundering.

and therefore the individual cannot be identified in person I do not see the problem. I will use the app. That is a given AFAIC.

Especially since you can later uninstall the app and you can always disable bluetooth whenever you please. The government can already triangulate your position. Sharing contacts for a few weeks using a voluntary app that you can disable at any time doesn't seem like a major invasion to me.

Small beer compared with pubs being closed for months.

I like a good pub.

But I am baffled by the moaning about them being closed.

They're a means to an end, surely? I can buy in better booze than most pubs, and cook as well as all but the top gastros.

You know they employed people right?

Philip_Thompson

kle4 said:

Philip_Thompson said:

TGOHF666 said:

Jonathan said:

It is clear that income tax is not going to pay for this.

Not yours. Your grandchildren’s perhaps.

Nobodies will pay for it. We'll pay for its interest in perpetuity.

We're just biding time until we can get to the moneyless society Star Trek promised us.

Heresy discussing Star Trek on today of all days . . .

dixiedean

FF43 said:

OllyT said:

geoffw said:

FPT

Stuartinromford said:

BigRich said:

FF43 said:

isam said:

https://twitter.com/clarkemicah/status/1257323501863616515?s=21

Sweden is shaping up to be bad but not necessarily disastrous. Not sure what we can learn from them, as a country that has done even worse. Not lock down and face a catastrophic death toll? Why would we want to learn from a country that has handled the epidemic poorly, albeit not as badly as us, when we can look to successful examples including next door Denmark?

I think you are missing the point of Hitshens argument.

take norway, looks to be doing well now with only 250 deaths, so far. and some damage to personall freedom and there econamy.

But what happens when they end the lock-down?

If they (unlikely) go back to 'normal' then R increases to 3 or whatever it was before, and loots of people get it very quickly.

If they go to a Sweden approach, then they will have to go though the same number (well proportion) of deaths as Sweden, but by then they will have damaged the econamy anyway.

Obviously there is the cavidat that a Vaccine may come along to save the day. or some for of advanced track and trace 'app' but we don't know when a Vaccine will be developed or haw effective track and trace will be.

That's the flaw though. Going back to an earlier conversation in this header, Norway won't go back to 3. Low key stuff (handwashing, not having massive sporting events) is enough to keep R to 1.something small.

Now any R greater than 1 is bad news, because it's still exponential growth which eventually goes huge. But if you must have that, you're better off doing it from a low baseline and with fewer deaths on the scorecard already. And the longer you delay the reckoning, the more likely it is that science will be able to save you.

The nub of Sweden versus the rest is a gamble on the date of an effective vaccine appearing. If one appears soon (i.e. before 2021) then the Swedes will have lost the gamble in terms of fatalities. But they would still have a less damaged economy. OTOH if a vaccine is a long time, or even never, to arrive then the Swedes will be seen to have made the right judgement as their overall health damage will not be much different from that of the others while they still have much less damage to their economy.

Do we actually know that the Swedes will have "a less damaged economy" or is that just an assumption?

A bit less damaged now probably, but countries can do a lot more if they are essentially free of the virus. People also have more confidence if they feel safe. We can see that in Asian countries that are continuing to function better than their European counterparts. I think you're better focusing on getting the infection and death rate down. You also save lives.

It's also a question of degree. We have has an unprecedented collapse of the global economy. Both on the supply and demand sides simultaneously. There really is no saving the economy in the short term anyway anywhere.
The question is who is best placed to begin the slow recovery
Not still being riddled with the virus and 20% of the workforce off sick confers certain advantages.

HYUFD

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/AllieHBNews/status/1257411918135992321/photo/1

https://twitter.com/resfoundation/status/1257430345470877696?s=20

HYUFD

https://twitter.com/MPIainDS/status/1257427033111527424?s=20