Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
We haven’t seen true exponential, though, have we? PB’ers with longer sentences will remember the mathematical modelling posted here by Henrietta and whichever hideaway account Sean was using at the time, projecting billions of global infections by now and millions of UK deaths. But we haven’t seen anything like that.
What we’ve seen is waves of infection that appear to gather speed pretty much regardless of whatever precautions and restrictions are in place at the time, but then level off much earlier than you’d expect from the proportions of people supposedly infected. My completely amateur conclusion is that a lot more people have some sort of innate resistance to this virus than has so far been proven.
I am put in mind of the estimable Mr. Babbage, who once wrote: ‘On two occasions I have been asked, — "Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?" In one case a member of the Upper, and in the other a member of the Lower, House put this question. I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.’
Howard Kirk is supposed to be based on sociologist and Radio 4 presenter of 'Thinking Aloud' Laurie Taylor.
So, I was partly right when I wrote "Prof Howard Kirk would have ended up his shagging career as a left-wing Master of an Oxbridge College and a talking head on Radio 4."
What is the evidence for Laurie Taylor?
From my viewing post, virtually every Arts & Humanities Professor in Oxbridge in the 1990s was behaving like Howard Kirk.
'The History Man' is a decade or so earlier, but I'd say there was no serious shortage of role models
The History Man is a great book (indeed, there wasn't much written by Malcolm Bradbury, that wasn't great - and let's not forget he also wrote a brilliant TV series satirising the EEC).
However, as someone who spent three years at an Oxbridge College in the mid-1990s, I didn't see any characters that were like Howard Kirk. Indeed, the humanities professors and teachers I knew had a pretty wide gamut of views.
I had wondered whether the similarity between your username & that of a certain Cambridge bulletin board regular was co-incidental or not.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
The stupid people are those who think that Members of Parliament shouldn't represent their voters, many of whom don't believe in lockdowns (and many of whom believe we should have locked down earlier).
And the terrifying ones are those who are sure that everybody who disagrees with them is stupid.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
We haven’t seen true exponential, though, have we? PB’ers with longer sentences will remember the mathematical modelling posted here by Henrietta and whichever hideaway account Sean was using at the time, projecting billions of global infections by now and millions of UK deaths. But we haven’t seen anything like that.
What we’ve seen is waves of infection that appear to gather speed pretty much regardless of whatever precautions and restrictions are in place at the time, but then level off much earlier than you’d expect from the proportions of people supposedly infected. My completely amateur conclusion is that a lot more people have some sort of innate resistance to this virus than has so far been proven.
I agree that we've seen rather few weeks of exponential growth, and more of linear-ish growth.
But I'm afraid your hypothesis doesn't stack up, otherwise there wouldn't have been a second wave like this (if you compare restrictions in Sep/Oct with restrictions when infections were coming down). Much more likely explanation for the leveling off is the restrictions, both imposed and self-imposed, plus weather effects. I remember someone had made a modified SEIR model that used reported deaths as an additional term, reducing contacts, (so a considerable lag to infections) and showed that this could explain the curves seen; however, I'm very skeptical as to the robustness of that conclusion because there would be a lot of parameters and a model that can explain the past, unless extremely simple, is something to be suspicious of until it makes predictions.
We really can't say what happened "regardless of whatever precautions and restrictions..." because we simply didn't observe the other case. It would be interesting if people could voluntarily sign up to a privacy-invading-but-pseudonymous app that would record social contacts, so that we could track that through a pandemic, and see if that is enough to explain the curves. Not practicable here, of course.
Back in the day it would have been Jimmy Savile and Gary Glitter.
If they actually wanted to convince the suspicious masses it would be people like Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage. In the event, it's more likely to be people like Kirsty Allsopp and Jamie Oliver.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
The stupid people are those who think that Members of Parliament shouldn't represent their voters, many of whom don't believe in lockdowns (and many of whom believe we should have locked down earlier).
And the terrifying ones are those who are sure that everybody who disagrees with them is stupid.
As I understand all the backbench lockdown rebels have asked is that Gove actually publishing some evidence for his claims.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
Recover their bodies and deduce from their presence in the chamber, or read their written account of their thought process.
Back in the day it would have been Jimmy Savile and Gary Glitter.
If they actually wanted to convince the suspicious masses it would be people like Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage. In the event, it's more likely to be people like Kirsty Allsopp and Jamie Oliver.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
The stupid people are those who think that Members of Parliament shouldn't represent their voters, many of whom don't believe in lockdowns (and many of whom believe we should have locked down earlier).
And the terrifying ones are those who are sure that everybody who disagrees with them is stupid.
As I understand all the backbench lockdown rebels have asked is that Gove actually publishing some evidence for his claims.
Back in the day it would have been Jimmy Savile and Gary Glitter.
If they actually wanted to convince the suspicious masses it would be people like Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage. In the event, it's more likely to be people like Kirsty Allsopp and Jamie Oliver.
Hm. I wouldn't want to be injected with anything recommended by Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage.
Back in the day it would have been Jimmy Savile and Gary Glitter.
If they actually wanted to convince the suspicious masses it would be people like Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage. In the event, it's more likely to be people like Kirsty Allsopp and Jamie Oliver.
Hm. I wouldn't want to be injected with anything recommended by Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage.
Presumably you're not the one that needs convincing.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
Recover their bodies and deduce from their presence in the chamber, or read their written account of their thought process.
I think there are intercomms in these things.
I'm sure I heard about something similar but this was divers in a chamber on an oil rig in the path of a typhoon. When I try google it I cant find any evidence though. Makes me think it may have been an invention.
Why do politicians always that getting some celebs to back something will convince the masses? If this was the case, Labour would win ever election by a country mile.
Remember all.the talk of how important Russell Brand endorsement of Miliband was or Stormzy being a big Corbyn fan.
The former nudge unit at #10 were far more successful in influencing public behaviour without anybody really noticing, from increasing prompt payment of taxes to getting people to switch to e-cigs from traditional ones.
Howard Kirk is supposed to be based on sociologist and Radio 4 presenter of 'Thinking Aloud' Laurie Taylor.
So, I was partly right when I wrote "Prof Howard Kirk would have ended up his shagging career as a left-wing Master of an Oxbridge College and a talking head on Radio 4."
What is the evidence for Laurie Taylor?
From my viewing post, virtually every Arts & Humanities Professor in Oxbridge in the 1990s was behaving like Howard Kirk.
'The History Man' is a decade or so earlier, but I'd say there was no serious shortage of role models
The History Man is a great book (indeed, there wasn't much written by Malcolm Bradbury, that wasn't great - and let's not forget he also wrote a brilliant TV series satirising the EEC).
However, as someone who spent three years at an Oxbridge College in the mid-1990s, I didn't see any characters that were like Howard Kirk. Indeed, the humanities professors and teachers I knew had a pretty wide gamut of views.
Back in the day it would have been Jimmy Savile and Gary Glitter.
If they actually wanted to convince the suspicious masses it would be people like Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage. In the event, it's more likely to be people like Kirsty Allsopp and Jamie Oliver.
Hm. I wouldn't want to be injected with anything recommended by Katie Hopkins and Nigel Farage.
Well, it’s more direct than the ‘Eye Need’ comments.
Perhaps I should try it. I can prove why Betfair are being jackasses about paying out, but I need £200,000 for computer tech and to bribe people for it.
We are talking about Apples grift right? Knowing fan boys will pay $1000 for a monitor stand and 10x the price for a comparable computer because its in a cool case?
Why do politicians always that getting some celebs to back something will convince the masses? If this was the case, Labour would win ever election by a country mile.
Remember all.the talk of how important Russell Brand endorsement of Miliband was or Stormzy being a big Corbyn fan.
The former nudge unit at #10 were far more successful in influencing public behaviour without anybody really noticing, from increasing prompt payment of taxes to getting people to switch to e-cigs from traditional ones.
I don't remember either being seen as important, but certainly endorsements do little. And anyone endorsing fo the government is more likely to see their stock lowered with the public than the message more likely to be received, even if it is a worthy one.
Why do politicians always that getting some celebs to back something will convince the masses? If this was the case, Labour would win ever election by a country mile.
Remember all.the talk of how important Russell Brand endorsement of Miliband was or Stormzy being a big Corbyn fan.
The former nudge unit at #10 were far more successful in influencing public behaviour without anybody really noticing, from increasing prompt payment of taxes to getting people to switch to e-cigs from traditional ones.
I don't remember either being seen as important, but certainly endorsements do little. And anyone endorsing fo the government is more likely to see their stock lowered with the public than the message more likely to be received, even if it is a worthy one.
There were 10000s of words written about how important Russell Brand was at the time and Ed went to do an interview with him in the middle of the night at his flar as it was seen as so important to get it done.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
The stupid people are those who think that Members of Parliament shouldn't represent their voters, many of whom don't believe in lockdowns (and many of whom believe we should have locked down earlier).
And the terrifying ones are those who are sure that everybody who disagrees with them is stupid.
As I understand all the backbench lockdown rebels have asked is that Gove actually publishing some evidence for his claims.
Not much to ask is it?
Except that the government did - on a weekly basis. If you don't like that, Foxy et al of this parish can tell you all about hospitals filling up with fake patients with fake COVID. And faking dying of it.....
The issue is exactly representing people. People who don't want to believe x. Given them evidence and they shift to y. Then back to x....
If COVID is a real problem and lockdowns are required - well, it's too big a problem for them. At that point the messenger is the problem...... So, if you get rid of the messenger, then it all goes away.
Call yourself an apppe fan boy...no 6k monitor to plug your macbook into, disappointing.
I pretty much have every other Apple product though.
I need to start looking at gaming laptops/PCs though, I think I may have to buy a couple in the next year or so.
I would wait a few months. New chips from AMD and graphic cards from AMD / nivida have just come out, with a new intel chip out in January / February and suspicion more new grqphic card SKUs from nvidia
That might all sound like gobblegook, basically lots of new stuff, but limited supply at the moment and it is showing in the prices. A few months and last gen stuff will be dirt cheap and new gen be huge competition between AMD and Intel / Nvidia, which is great for prices.
David Attenborough Judi Dench Trevor McDonald David Walliams Bradley Wiggins Jessica Ennis-HIll Marcus Rashford Oh, and er... Gary Lineker
To name but a few.
Shouldn't they be lockdown skeptics for that full fat appeal to those who want their freedom back?
Tobes Sumption Right Said Fred That mad bird off Loose Women . . . Piers?
It would certainly shake the anti vaxxers out of the undergrowth.
Would Lord Sumption be able to cope with the media duties that would entail given according to the likes of Peter Hitchens that the Metropolitan Liberal Elite have ensured Sumption is silence during the pandemic,
Call yourself an apppe fan boy...no 6k monitor to plug your macbook into, disappointing.
I pretty much have every other Apple product though.
I need to start looking at gaming laptops/PCs though, I think I may have to buy a couple in the next year or so.
I would wait a few months. New chips from AMD and graphic cards from AMD / nivida have just come out, with a new intel chip out in January / February and suspicion more new grqphic card SKUs from nvidia
That might all sound like gobblegook, basically lots of new stuff, but limited supply at the moment and it is showing in the prices. A few months and last gen stuff will be dirt cheap and new gen be huge competition between AMD and Intel / Nvidia, which is great for prices.
Ta, the kids can enjoy the PS5 for a few months whilst they wait.
Well, it’s more direct than the ‘Eye Need’ comments.
Perhaps I should try it. I can prove why Betfair are being jackasses about paying out, but I need £200,000 for computer tech and to bribe people for it.
*Looks round hopefully*
Is this what you are thinking of?
£218,111.12 for a pair of 64 core EPYC processors, 1 TB RAM, and 8 A100 GPUs.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
Recover their bodies and deduce from their presence in the chamber, or read their written account of their thought process.
I think there are intercomms in these things.
I'm sure I heard about something similar but this was divers in a chamber on an oil rig in the path of a typhoon. When I try google it I cant find any evidence though. Makes me think it may have been an invention.
It has happened again - I seem to recall and Iranian accident - to the point that modern practice is that the decompression chamber should be designed to float free of the ship or rig it is on.
I've been offered a 13" M1 Macbook Pro through work, not sure whether to take it or wait for next year's version, will have to wait until 2023 to upgrade if I take it.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
The stupid people are those who think that Members of Parliament shouldn't represent their voters, many of whom don't believe in lockdowns (and many of whom believe we should have locked down earlier).
And the terrifying ones are those who are sure that everybody who disagrees with them is stupid.
As I understand all the backbench lockdown rebels have asked is that Gove actually publishing some evidence for his claims.
Not much to ask is it?
Except that the government did - on a weekly basis. If you don't like that, Foxy et al of this parish can tell you all about hospitals filling up with fake patients with fake COVID. And faking dying of it.....
The issue is exactly representing people. People who don't want to believe x. Given them evidence and they shift to y. Then back to x....
If COVID is a real problem and lockdowns are required - well, it's too big a problem for them. At that point the messenger is the problem...... So, if you get rid of the messenger, then it all goes away.
They have not helped themselves with the dodgy graphs though. You know the ones... Out of date even before being used to scare the public.
David Attenborough Judi Dench Trevor McDonald David Walliams Bradley Wiggins Jessica Ennis-HIll Marcus Rashford Oh, and er... Gary Lineker
To name but a few.
Shouldn't they be lockdown skeptics for that full fat appeal to those who want their freedom back?
Tobes Sumption Right Said Fred That mad bird off Loose Women . . . Piers?
It would certainly shake the anti vaxxers out of the undergrowth.
Would Lord Sumption be able to cope with the media duties that would entail given according to the likes of Peter Hitchens that the Metropolitan Liberal Elite have ensured Sumption is silence during the pandemic,
It's true, like an erstwhile guest of Hezbollah he will emerge pale and blinking into the glare of publicity which he definitely does not seek, but good of the nation and all that..
Did anyone watching live not immediately think he was dead?
Amazing efforts over the years to make F1 cars and racing safer, that he could walk away from such an utterly horrific accident with only minor burns on his hands, and not a single broken bone in his body.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
Vital being a very appropriate word given the risks involved...
I think that visiting family over Christmas is a serious mistake - my elderly uncle in a care home has asked me to visit, and I've reluctantly said I don't think I should. Most though not all the people I know are taking similar decisions; some are doing the opposite. It's a dilemma and I wouldn't sneer at anyone taking the decision either way.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
The stupid people are those who think that Members of Parliament shouldn't represent their voters, many of whom don't believe in lockdowns (and many of whom believe we should have locked down earlier).
And the terrifying ones are those who are sure that everybody who disagrees with them is stupid.
As I understand all the backbench lockdown rebels have asked is that Gove actually publishing some evidence for his claims.
Not much to ask is it?
Except that the government did - on a weekly basis. If you don't like that, Foxy et al of this parish can tell you all about hospitals filling up with fake patients with fake COVID. And faking dying of it.....
The issue is exactly representing people. People who don't want to believe x. Given them evidence and they shift to y. Then back to x....
If COVID is a real problem and lockdowns are required - well, it's too big a problem for them. At that point the messenger is the problem...... So, if you get rid of the messenger, then it all goes away.
They have not helped themselves with the dodgy graphs though. You know the ones... Out of date even before being used to scare the public.
Excepting that the "dodgy graphs" turned out to be rather close to reality, until the results of taking action (tiers & lockdown) caused the numbers to diverge.
It's all symptoms of "I want to believe" - It's all false positives. it's all dodgy graphs, it's better in Sweden, it's an attempt to take of the government, it's an attempt to inject microchips into everyone...
I've been offered a 13" M1 Macbook Pro through work, not sure whether to take it or wait for next year's version, will have to wait until 2023 to upgrade if I take it.
I’m waiting for the 64GB/4TB version, which should be next year. Modern laptops are impossible to upgrade, so get the best one you can. The current laptop is an old 2013 MBP which has finally reached its upgrade limit!
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
The stupid people are those who think that Members of Parliament shouldn't represent their voters, many of whom don't believe in lockdowns (and many of whom believe we should have locked down earlier).
And the terrifying ones are those who are sure that everybody who disagrees with them is stupid.
As I understand all the backbench lockdown rebels have asked is that Gove actually publishing some evidence for his claims.
Not much to ask is it?
Why don't they just go and visit their local hospital and have a stroll through the respiratory ward?
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
Vital being a very appropriate word given the risks involved...
I think that visiting family over Christmas is a serious mistake - my elderly uncle in a care home has asked me to visit, and I've reluctantly said I don't think I should. Most though not all the people I know are taking similar decisions; some are doing the opposite. It's a dilemma and I wouldn't sneer at anyone taking the decision either way.
Care homes now have very good protocols for this, with PPE etc, but a bit of social distancing beforehand would make it safer still.
I've been offered a 13" M1 Macbook Pro through work, not sure whether to take it or wait for next year's version, will have to wait until 2023 to upgrade if I take it.
I’m waiting for the 64GB/4TB version, which should be next year. Modern laptops are impossible to upgrade, so get the best one you can. The current laptop is an old 2013 MBP which has finally reached its upgrade limit!
Apple ones especially! I don't need 4TB but 8GB RAM seems like not very much for the sorts of things I'd be wanting to do with it. Also want to know how good the GPU compute is and how it compares to Ampere. I wish I could get the PS5 GPU, I'm told it has got incredible compute abilities well beyond what consumer GPUs have available for the next 3 or 4 years.
Turns out that driving a bus during Covid has a greater risk of death than driving an F1 car.
Your chances of dying in Formula 1 have been pretty low for years. Unless you have people welding steering columns with a complete absence of skill in designing, preparing or actually carrying out a weld.
I've been offered a 13" M1 Macbook Pro through work, not sure whether to take it or wait for next year's version, will have to wait until 2023 to upgrade if I take it.
I’m waiting for the 64GB/4TB version, which should be next year. Modern laptops are impossible to upgrade, so get the best one you can. The current laptop is an old 2013 MBP which has finally reached its upgrade limit!
I got the M1 Mac Mini, simply because I was really excited to see how an ARM based PC would work out. (I handed a Surface Book X back after a week.)
And the answer is...
So long as you're running apps that are compiled for the M1, it's awesome. Stuff that is x64 code that is converted before running is usually good, but seems to fall over when its called upon to use multiple threads. (Brave with a dozen browser tabs open is unusable. Chrome - which is a native M1 binary - is fine.)
USB compatibility seems a bit spotty. There are quite a few peripherals (basically anything more than 18 months old) that don't seem to work.
Playing Steam games, I think only about 20% (Into the Breach) work OK, the other 80% don't. That will hopefully largely be solved as people cross compile.
So...
I wouldn't get it yet, *unless* you live entirely with Apple native apps or in Chrome.
I've been offered a 13" M1 Macbook Pro through work, not sure whether to take it or wait for next year's version, will have to wait until 2023 to upgrade if I take it.
I’m waiting for the 64GB/4TB version, which should be next year. Modern laptops are impossible to upgrade, so get the best one you can. The current laptop is an old 2013 MBP which has finally reached its upgrade limit!
I got the M1 Mac Mini, simply because I was really excited to see how an ARM based PC would work out. (I handed a Surface Book X back after a week.)
And the answer is...
So long as you're running apps that are compiled for the M1, it's awesome. Stuff that is x64 code that is converted before running is usually good, but seems to fall over when its called upon to use multiple threads. (Brave with a dozen browser tabs open is unusable. Chrome - which is a native M1 binary - is fine.)
USB compatibility seems a bit spotty. There are quite a few peripherals (basically anything more than 18 months old) that don't seem to work.
Playing Steam games, I think only about 20% (Into the Breach) work OK, the other 80% don't. That will hopefully largely be solved as people cross compile.
So...
I wouldn't get it yet, *unless* you live entirely with Apple native apps or in Chrome.
How does it do with complicated maths and ML in Python? That's my main use scenario and it's why I'm not sure I want to move away from my current setup.
I've been offered a 13" M1 Macbook Pro through work, not sure whether to take it or wait for next year's version, will have to wait until 2023 to upgrade if I take it.
I’m waiting for the 64GB/4TB version, which should be next year. Modern laptops are impossible to upgrade, so get the best one you can. The current laptop is an old 2013 MBP which has finally reached its upgrade limit!
I got the M1 Mac Mini, simply because I was really excited to see how an ARM based PC would work out. (I handed a Surface Book X back after a week.)
And the answer is...
So long as you're running apps that are compiled for the M1, it's awesome. Stuff that is x64 code that is converted before running is usually good, but seems to fall over when its called upon to use multiple threads. (Brave with a dozen browser tabs open is unusable. Chrome - which is a native M1 binary - is fine.)
USB compatibility seems a bit spotty. There are quite a few peripherals (basically anything more than 18 months old) that don't seem to work.
Playing Steam games, I think only about 20% (Into the Breach) work OK, the other 80% don't. That will hopefully largely be solved as people cross compile.
So...
I wouldn't get it yet, *unless* you live entirely with Apple native apps or in Chrome.
That matches up with what I’ve seen and read about them. The x64 emulation is slow, as you’d expect, but the native code is really fast. There’s an awful lot of software not yet native, so probably worth waiting a bit for the rest of the world to catch up.
I've been offered a 13" M1 Macbook Pro through work, not sure whether to take it or wait for next year's version, will have to wait until 2023 to upgrade if I take it.
I’m waiting for the 64GB/4TB version, which should be next year. Modern laptops are impossible to upgrade, so get the best one you can. The current laptop is an old 2013 MBP which has finally reached its upgrade limit!
I got the M1 Mac Mini, simply because I was really excited to see how an ARM based PC would work out. (I handed a Surface Book X back after a week.)
And the answer is...
So long as you're running apps that are compiled for the M1, it's awesome. Stuff that is x64 code that is converted before running is usually good, but seems to fall over when its called upon to use multiple threads. (Brave with a dozen browser tabs open is unusable. Chrome - which is a native M1 binary - is fine.)
USB compatibility seems a bit spotty. There are quite a few peripherals (basically anything more than 18 months old) that don't seem to work.
Playing Steam games, I think only about 20% (Into the Breach) work OK, the other 80% don't. That will hopefully largely be solved as people cross compile.
So...
I wouldn't get it yet, *unless* you live entirely with Apple native apps or in Chrome.
How does it do with complicated maths and ML in Python? That's my main use scenario and it's why I'm not sure I want to move away from my current setup.
I would be very careful until you make sure that there are native compiles of all the software you want to use, that are bug free.
The other issue is that some reviewers have encountered severe throttling under load - at least for the Air - as a way of dealing with thermal management.
Did anyone watching live not immediately think he was dead?
Amazing efforts over the years to make F1 cars and racing safer, that he could walk away from such an utterly horrific accident with only minor burns on his hands, and not a single broken bone in his body.
Some accidents you cant believe weren't fatal. But Dale Earnhardt's accident to me looked so innocuous and yet it cost him his life.
Care homes now have very good protocols for this, with PPE etc, but a bit of social distancing beforehand would make it safer still.
If he was nearby I think I would, but it's a long journey down to Penzance and I'd need to stay somewhere - my usual hosts are a couple, one of whom is 95, so probably not fair to ask them. Staying in a B&B and then visiting the care home... um.
Basically I'd rather wait till at least one of us is vaccinated.
I've been offered a 13" M1 Macbook Pro through work, not sure whether to take it or wait for next year's version, will have to wait until 2023 to upgrade if I take it.
I’m waiting for the 64GB/4TB version, which should be next year. Modern laptops are impossible to upgrade, so get the best one you can. The current laptop is an old 2013 MBP which has finally reached its upgrade limit!
I got the M1 Mac Mini, simply because I was really excited to see how an ARM based PC would work out. (I handed a Surface Book X back after a week.)
And the answer is...
So long as you're running apps that are compiled for the M1, it's awesome. Stuff that is x64 code that is converted before running is usually good, but seems to fall over when its called upon to use multiple threads. (Brave with a dozen browser tabs open is unusable. Chrome - which is a native M1 binary - is fine.)
USB compatibility seems a bit spotty. There are quite a few peripherals (basically anything more than 18 months old) that don't seem to work.
Playing Steam games, I think only about 20% (Into the Breach) work OK, the other 80% don't. That will hopefully largely be solved as people cross compile.
So...
I wouldn't get it yet, *unless* you live entirely with Apple native apps or in Chrome.
How does it do with complicated maths and ML in Python? That's my main use scenario and it's why I'm not sure I want to move away from my current setup.
As everybody knows I am not apple fanboy, but this might be of interest,
TensorFlow users on Intel Macs or Macs powered by Apple’s new M1 chip can now take advantage of accelerated training using Apple’s Mac-optimized version of TensorFlow 2.4 and the new ML Compute framework.
Care homes now have very good protocols for this, with PPE etc, but a bit of social distancing beforehand would make it safer still.
If he was nearby I think I would, but it's a long journey down to Penzance and I'd need to stay somewhere - my usual hosts are a couple, one of whom is 95, so probably not fair to ask them. Staying in a B&B and then visiting the care home... um.
Basically I'd rather wait till at least one of us is vaccinated.
Yes, it would be hard to stay isolated on such a trip. I think you may well be best to stay away.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
The stupid people are those who think that Members of Parliament shouldn't represent their voters, many of whom don't believe in lockdowns (and many of whom believe we should have locked down earlier).
And the terrifying ones are those who are sure that everybody who disagrees with them is stupid.
As I understand all the backbench lockdown rebels have asked is that Gove actually publishing some evidence for his claims.
Not much to ask is it?
Except that the government did - on a weekly basis. If you don't like that, Foxy et al of this parish can tell you all about hospitals filling up with fake patients with fake COVID. And faking dying of it.....
The issue is exactly representing people. People who don't want to believe x. Given them evidence and they shift to y. Then back to x....
If COVID is a real problem and lockdowns are required - well, it's too big a problem for them. At that point the messenger is the problem...... So, if you get rid of the messenger, then it all goes away.
They have not helped themselves with the dodgy graphs though. You know the ones... Out of date even before being used to scare the public.
Excepting that the "dodgy graphs" turned out to be rather close to reality, until the results of taking action (tiers & lockdown) caused the numbers to diverge.
It's all symptoms of "I want to believe" - It's all false positives. it's all dodgy graphs, it's better in Sweden, it's an attempt to take of the government, it's an attempt to inject microchips into everyone...
1. If you have a strong case, then you absolutely DO NOT want to weaken it with dodgy graphs. The graphs were clearly dodgy, as their likelihood contours were implausible (in fact, they had been chopped off from an earlier analysis, and not properly recomputed).
There are many seeming inconsistencies in the analyses published by ONS or SAGE. E.g., very often their dot and bar estimates on incidence rate versus time and their likelihood contours do not overlap. Both of these are supposed to be 95% intervals, meaning that they are both claimed to have a 95% chance of including the real value. Clearly, (at least) one is not a 95% CL.
2. If the dodgy graphs subsequently proved reliable, that is actually worse news. They made (at least) two errors and they were very lucky that the errors cancelled, or partially cancelled. That might not happen again.
This is a matter of great gravity -- it is perfectly reasonable to expect ONS/SAGE to get the details right. They should have access to the best statisticians, the best computers, the best expertise.
They should be up to the job of presenting a very strong case with watertight, impeccable statistics.
I've been offered a 13" M1 Macbook Pro through work, not sure whether to take it or wait for next year's version, will have to wait until 2023 to upgrade if I take it.
I’m waiting for the 64GB/4TB version, which should be next year. Modern laptops are impossible to upgrade, so get the best one you can. The current laptop is an old 2013 MBP which has finally reached its upgrade limit!
I got the M1 Mac Mini, simply because I was really excited to see how an ARM based PC would work out. (I handed a Surface Book X back after a week.)
And the answer is...
So long as you're running apps that are compiled for the M1, it's awesome. Stuff that is x64 code that is converted before running is usually good, but seems to fall over when its called upon to use multiple threads. (Brave with a dozen browser tabs open is unusable. Chrome - which is a native M1 binary - is fine.)
USB compatibility seems a bit spotty. There are quite a few peripherals (basically anything more than 18 months old) that don't seem to work.
Playing Steam games, I think only about 20% (Into the Breach) work OK, the other 80% don't. That will hopefully largely be solved ayes, thatsms people cross compile.
So...
I wouldn't get it yet, *unless* you live entirely with Apple native apps or in Chrome.
How does it do with complicated maths and ML in Python? That's my main use scenario and it's why I'm not sure I want to move away from my current setup.
I would be very careful until you make sure that there are native compiles of all the software you want to use, that are bug free.
The other issue is that some reviewers have encountered severe throttling under load - at least for the Air - as a way of dealing with thermal management.
Yes, that's my major worry with shifting to ARM none of what I use will be native for a while at least and Apple are prioritising Photoshop and other creative programs over stuff that I need.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
We haven’t seen true exponential, though, have we? PB’ers with longer sentences will remember the mathematical modelling posted here by Henrietta and whichever hideaway account Sean was using at the time, projecting billions of global infections by now and millions of UK deaths. But we haven’t seen anything like that.
What we’ve seen is waves of infection that appear to gather speed pretty much regardless of whatever precautions and restrictions are in place at the time, but then level off much earlier than you’d expect from the proportions of people supposedly infected. My completely amateur conclusion is that a lot more people have some sort of innate resistance to this virus than has so far been proven.
I’ve seen people saying this a few times, but it doesn’t seem at all correct. You can see the effect of differences in precautions and restrictions across borders of neighbouring countries. Norway and Sweden - very different approaches and very different outcomes. North Dakota and Manitoba - enormous differences. Death tolls vary hugely between countries, which is something you wouldn’t see if it was just running wild until some innate resistance kicks in.
And areas hit hardest in the first wave would have the greatest resistance now (otherwise why did it fall away the first time if it wasn’t the effects of restrictions?)
It has the feel of an attractive myth - that would mean we wouldn’t have to do anything, which is why it would be attractive. I think a lot of proof would be required before most of us would believe it, and it would have to address those enormous variations and the resurgence of the second wave.
Last week, they put directional mics on the QBs in one game of the hand egg, which they played over the top of the coverage. One of the QBs was just awesome, full running commentary as he played, taking the piss out of the other players as they lined up. It was a one man stand up show.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
The stupid people are those who think that Members of Parliament shouldn't represent their voters, many of whom don't believe in lockdowns (and many of whom believe we should have locked down earlier).
And the terrifying ones are those who are sure that everybody who disagrees with them is stupid.
As I understand all the backbench lockdown rebels have asked is that Gove actually publishing some evidence for his claims.
Not much to ask is it?
They will find something - anything - in whatever the government publishes to justify voting against.
It’s like when the opposition calls in the government to publish X
I've been offered a 13" M1 Macbook Pro through work, not sure whether to take it or wait for next year's version, will have to wait until 2023 to upgrade if I take it.
I’m waiting for the 64GB/4TB version, which should be next year. Modern laptops are impossible to upgrade, so get the best one you can. The current laptop is an old 2013 MBP which has finally reached its upgrade limit!
I got the M1 Mac Mini, simply because I was really excited to see how an ARM based PC would work out. (I handed a Surface Book X back after a week.)
And the answer is...
So long as you're running apps that are compiled for the M1, it's awesome. Stuff that is x64 code that is converted before running is usually good, but seems to fall over when its called upon to use multiple threads. (Brave with a dozen browser tabs open is unusable. Chrome - which is a native M1 binary - is fine.)
USB compatibility seems a bit spotty. There are quite a few peripherals (basically anything more than 18 months old) that don't seem to work.
Playing Steam games, I think only about 20% (Into the Breach) work OK, the other 80% don't. That will hopefully largely be solved ayes, thatsms people cross compile.
So...
I wouldn't get it yet, *unless* you live entirely with Apple native apps or in Chrome.
How does it do with complicated maths and ML in Python? That's my main use scenario and it's why I'm not sure I want to move away from my current setup.
I would be very careful until you make sure that there are native compiles of all the software you want to use, that are bug free.
The other issue is that some reviewers have encountered severe throttling under load - at least for the Air - as a way of dealing with thermal management.
Yes, that's my major worry with shifting to ARM none of what I use will be native for a while at least and Apple are prioritising Photoshop and other creative programs over stuff that I need.
I think, given the interesting architecture that the high performance lot will be all over this like alcoholics offered free single malt.
I would just give it x months of development before buying kit.
It also seems that they are changing their lines over starting with the low end machines.
I'm not looking to replace my hardware until there is a good 12 months of this chipset being out, software being ported over etc.
That matches up with what I’ve seen and read about them. The x64 emulation is slow, as you’d expect, but the native code is really fast. There’s an awful lot of software not yet native, so probably worth waiting a bit for the rest of the world to catch up.
Slow is not really correct, even emulating x86 the M1 is quite fast. Amongst serious computer geeks the performance of Rosetta 2 is a more surprising outcome than the performance of the M1 itself. Apple's done a better job than DEC did with FX!32, Transmeta did with CMS on the Crusoe chips, or Intel itself did with latter versions of the Itanium.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
We haven’t seen true exponential, though, have we? PB’ers with longer sentences will remember the mathematical modelling posted here by Henrietta and whichever hideaway account Sean was using at the time, projecting billions of global infections by now and millions of UK deaths. But we haven’t seen anything like that.
What we’ve seen is waves of infection that appear to gather speed pretty much regardless of whatever precautions and restrictions are in place at the time, but then level off much earlier than you’d expect from the proportions of people supposedly infected. My completely amateur conclusion is that a lot more people have some sort of innate resistance to this virus than has so far been proven.
I’ve seen people saying this a few times, but it doesn’t seem at all correct. You can see the effect of differences in precautions and restrictions across borders of neighbouring countries. Norway and Sweden - very different approaches and very different outcomes. North Dakota and Manitoba - enormous differences. Death tolls vary hugely between countries, which is something you wouldn’t see if it was just running wild until some innate resistance kicks in.
And areas hit hardest in the first wave would have the greatest resistance now (otherwise why did it fall away the first time if it wasn’t the effects of restrictions?)
It has the feel of an attractive myth - that would mean we wouldn’t have to do anything, which is why it would be attractive. I think a lot of proof would be required before most of us would believe it, and it would have to address those enormous variations and the resurgence of the second wave.
I have relatives in one of the places that went out of control - Peru. At the end, a kind of broken back self lockdown occurs. In the worst possible way....
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
Vital being a very appropriate word given the risks involved...
I think that visiting family over Christmas is a serious mistake - my elderly uncle in a care home has asked me to visit, and I've reluctantly said I don't think I should. Most though not all the people I know are taking similar decisions; some are doing the opposite. It's a dilemma and I wouldn't sneer at anyone taking the decision either way.
Agreed. It’s my Mum’s first Christmas since my dad died, but she’s in her 70s... crap. I suspect we will go but then sit in the toy room and open all the doors to get a nice cross breeze
One annoyance in the “lockdown sceptics” series of arguments is the way they never hold their own arguments and predictions remotely accountable.
Confidently saying there were no excess deaths this year as the first wave built up. And then not even and “oops, I guess we were wrong.”
Each and every statement on Sweden, since disproved, all of which may never have been said for all they have to say on it.
That the IFR is well below one in a thousand, maybe one in ten thousand. Toby even tried to revive that briefly, using the death figures to make his point as we have to take them into accou... oh. Oops. And now silence there.
Opening schools will have no issues and children don’t even pass on the virus. That aged well.
We can release all restrictions and nothing bad will happen.
There won’t be a second wave.
There’s no point kicking the can down the road, vaccines won’t come along to save us.
There’s no excess deaths THIS time, and here’s a dodgy graph sourced from a conspiracy theorist on Twitter to “prove” it.
Never a single acknowledgement of the repeated wrong nature of any of it, never any hint of an analysis of where they went wrong, always the squeaking sound of goalposts shifting.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
The stupid people are those who think that Members of Parliament shouldn't represent their voters, many of whom don't believe in lockdowns (and many of whom believe we should have locked down earlier).
And the terrifying ones are those who are sure that everybody who disagrees with them is stupid.
As I understand all the backbench lockdown rebels have asked is that Gove actually publishing some evidence for his claims.
Not much to ask is it?
Except that the government did - on a weekly basis. If you don't like that, Foxy et al of this parish can tell you all about hospitals filling up with fake patients with fake COVID. And faking dying of it.....
The issue is exactly representing people. People who don't want to believe x. Given them evidence and they shift to y. Then back to x....
If COVID is a real problem and lockdowns are required - well, it's too big a problem for them. At that point the messenger is the problem...... So, if you get rid of the messenger, then it all goes away.
They have not helped themselves with the dodgy graphs though. You know the ones... Out of date even before being used to scare the public.
Excepting that the "dodgy graphs" turned out to be rather close to reality, until the results of taking action (tiers & lockdown) caused the numbers to diverge.
It's all symptoms of "I want to believe" - It's all false positives. it's all dodgy graphs, it's better in Sweden, it's an attempt to take of the government, it's an attempt to inject microchips into everyone...
One annoyance in the “lockdown sceptics” series of arguments is the way they never hold their own arguments and predictions remotely accountable.
Confidently saying there were no excess deaths this year as the first wave built up. And then not even and “oops, I guess we were wrong.”
Each and every statement on Sweden, since disproved, all of which may never have been said for all they have to say on it.
That the IFR is well below one in a thousand, maybe one in ten thousand. Toby even tried to revive that briefly, using the death figures to make his point as we have to take them into accou... oh. Oops. And now silence there.
Opening schools will have no issues and children don’t even pass on the virus. That aged well.
We can release all restrictions and nothing bad will happen.
There won’t be a second wave.
There’s no point kicking the can down the road, vaccines won’t come along to save us.
There’s no excess deaths THIS time, and here’s a dodgy graph sourced from a conspiracy theorist on Twitter to “prove” it.
Never a single acknowledgement of the repeated wrong nature of any of it, never any hint of an analysis of where they went wrong, always the squeaking sound of goalposts shifting.
It's like all conspiracy theory stuff - anti-vaxxer stuff is a classic of this genre...... It is self healing. There is literally nothing you could do or say that will make them say - "Shit man. I was wrong".
Any evidence you provide or refute will just cause the bullshit stream to move, to flow round it.
Malthouse worth covering for small stakes at 200/1 next PM then? Again with Brexit, you can imagine policing will be prominent in January.
There are three names in the quotation in the header, and my money would be on the middle one flying a kite. Malthouse is already a junior minister in the Home Office so if the Home Office is doing a bad job, why make him Home Secretary?
Kit Malthouse, the policing minister who was Johnson’s deputy mayor for policing in London and is a confidant of the PM, is favourite to take over the job, with Michael Gove and Dominic Raab also in the frame.
Gove finally ruined his chances yesterday with his call for MPs to back the new lockdown because every hospital bed will be swamped otherwise. He's blow it once and for all with backbenchers I reckon.
It's just such a blatant lie. Gove is a liar and far too treacherous.
What is it with people and this denial of how exponential growth works?
Gove was right: with a doubling time of (for the sake of argument) 10 days and a lag between infection and hospital admissions of about two weeks, if you wait for your hospitals to fill up before you impose a lockdown then you are far, far too late: at that point you’ve got roughly another doubling of cases to deal with before the lockdown starts to have any kind of effect.
If instead you don’t lockdown at all, then your health services become completely overwhelmed & non-covid cases start to die needlessly, as is apparently happening in some rural parts of the US right now.
You /have/ to lockdown early, because anything else is too late. That’s the way exponential growth with delayed onset works.
The facts...
1) during the first wave/lockdown, hospitals reached capacity. Everything was maxed out, and that by essentially stopping the NHS doing anything else. 2) the Nightingale hospitals are very much a last minute resort - to be manned by the retired, the students and and airline stewardesses 3) They nearly got pulled into use, none the less. 4) in the recent second wave, we were a few days away from reaching similar levels of hospital occupancy.
Without the Tiers/Lockdown, there was nothing to stop the same situation as 1) occurring followed by the Nightingale's going into operation, followed by.. extreme triage.... a few days later.
What the lockdown skeptics /also/ ignore that in this situation, your available medical staff are not some renewable resource that you can replenish at will. They are human beings subject to ordinary human limits & they /will/ burn out. You cannot run your medical staff on the kinds of shifts people were doing back in April for very long before people start failing on you. Which then compounds the effect on the rest of the staff.
Completely trashing the ability of the NHS to treat anyone at all seems like it might something that would be bad for the economy. This is why there are no good choices available to us. Until we can get everyone vaccinated we get to choose from a menu of bad and slightly less bad. As Gove says in his article, there is no simple trade-off between human lives and economic costs to make here. It doesn’t work like that.
That there is still such a thing as a lockdown sceptic in parliament is just another illustration of the truly terrifying levels of stupidity among our professional politicians.
It's not about stupidity.
For a sizeable chunk of people in the world, prioritising facts and emotion stimuli according to a scientific order is antithetical to their experience as human beings. Quite simply, if you put things in the logical, best-outcomes order, then you appear immoral or insane to them.
We have had, here many examples of people saying that they will break rules because human contact is so important to them.
Many people will travel to see their families this Christmas, because it is *vital* to them.
The study of human behaviour is a science too. How many psychologists, anthropologists and sociologists have been spoken to alongside the epidemiologists and economists?
I once read a harrowing tale of two deep sea divers in a decompression chamber on a ship about to go down. They had a choice of getting out and possibly suffering a crippling case of the bends, or staying with the ship in the hope they might get found in time before their oxygen ran out. They chose the latter - they were active people and the thought of the lifetime effects of the bends meant they wanted to take their chances in the chamber. They didn’t make it. Was that rational? To a bookish individual unfazed by staying at home no, but to a diver yes. Similarly there will come a point where people say they are not living but existing. Selfish? Yes, but in all societies and all people the communitarian spirit has limits. Those limits differ but it is absurd to call them “stupid”.
How do we know about that story if they didn’t make it?
The stupid people are those who think that Members of Parliament shouldn't represent their voters, many of whom don't believe in lockdowns (and many of whom believe we should have locked down earlier).
And the terrifying ones are those who are sure that everybody who disagrees with them is stupid.
As I understand all the backbench lockdown rebels have asked is that Gove actually publishing some evidence for his claims.
Not much to ask is it?
Except that the government did - on a weekly basis. If you don't like that, Foxy et al of this parish can tell you all about hospitals filling up with fake patients with fake COVID. And faking dying of it.....
The issue is exactly representing people. People who don't want to believe x. Given them evidence and they shift to y. Then back to x....
If COVID is a real problem and lockdowns are required - well, it's too big a problem for them. At that point the messenger is the problem...... So, if you get rid of the messenger, then it all goes away.
They have not helped themselves with the dodgy graphs though. You know the ones... Out of date even before being used to scare the public.
Excepting that the "dodgy graphs" turned out to be rather close to reality, until the results of taking action (tiers & lockdown) caused the numbers to diverge.
It's all symptoms of "I want to believe" - It's all false positives. it's all dodgy graphs, it's better in Sweden, it's an attempt to take of the government, it's an attempt to inject microchips into everyone...
Last week, they put directional mics on the QBs in one game of the hand egg, which they played over the top of the coverage. One of the QBs was just awesome, full running commentary as he played, taking the piss out of the other players as they lined up. It was a one man stand up show.
The QBs have radios in their helmets for every game. I think the radio helmets have green dots on them IIRC
I've been offered a 13" M1 Macbook Pro through work, not sure whether to take it or wait for next year's version, will have to wait until 2023 to upgrade if I take it.
I’m waiting for the 64GB/4TB version, which should be next year. Modern laptops are impossible to upgrade, so get the best one you can. The current laptop is an old 2013 MBP which has finally reached its upgrade limit!
I got the M1 Mac Mini, simply because I was really excited to see how an ARM based PC would work out. (I handed a Surface Book X back after a week.)
And the answer is...
So long as you're running apps that are compiled for the M1, it's awesome. Stuff that is x64 code that is converted before running is usually good, but seems to fall over when its called upon to use multiple threads. (Brave with a dozen browser tabs open is unusable. Chrome - which is a native M1 binary - is fine.)
USB compatibility seems a bit spotty. There are quite a few peripherals (basically anything more than 18 months old) that don't seem to work.
Playing Steam games, I think only about 20% (Into the Breach) work OK, the other 80% don't. That will hopefully largely be solved ayes, thatsms people cross compile.
So...
I wouldn't get it yet, *unless* you live entirely with Apple native apps or in Chrome.
How does it do with complicated maths and ML in Python? That's my main use scenario and it's why I'm not sure I want to move away from my current setup.
I would be very careful until you make sure that there are native compiles of all the software you want to use, that are bug free.
The other issue is that some reviewers have encountered severe throttling under load - at least for the Air - as a way of dealing with thermal management.
Yes, that's my major worry with shifting to ARM none of what I use will be native for a while at least and Apple are prioritising Photoshop and other creative programs over stuff that I need.
I think, given the interesting architecture that the high performance lot will be all over this like alcoholics offered free single malt.
I would just give it x months of development before buying kit.
It also seems that they are changing their lines over starting with the low end machines.
I'm not looking to replace my hardware until there is a good 12 months of this chipset being out, software being ported over etc.
Yeah that's one of the reasons I'm thinking of deferring my upgrade for year and taking the M2 version and maybe getting the 14" MBP, ideally 16 or 32 GB RAM as well, 8GB just doesn't strike me as enough even without the x86 overhead.
Last week, they put directional mics on the QBs in one game of the hand egg, which they played over the top of the coverage. One of the QBs was just awesome, full running commentary as he played, taking the piss out of the other players as they lined up. It was a one man stand up show.
The QBs have radios in their helmets for every game. I think the radio helmets have green dots on them IIRC
I was under the impression that the radio comms they have are a secure line between just them and the coaches, not for use by the TV?
I have in the past seen bits and pieces of the TV putting special mics on players or concentrating this directional mics at them, but this is the first time I have seen them just play it over the top of the coverage.
Comments
And the terrifying ones are those who are sure that everybody who disagrees with them is stupid.
https://twitter.com/PA/status/1333129574234910721
But I'm afraid your hypothesis doesn't stack up, otherwise there wouldn't have been a second wave like this (if you compare restrictions in Sep/Oct with restrictions when infections were coming down). Much more likely explanation for the leveling off is the restrictions, both imposed and self-imposed, plus weather effects. I remember someone had made a modified SEIR model that used reported deaths as an additional term, reducing contacts, (so a considerable lag to infections) and showed that this could explain the curves seen; however, I'm very skeptical as to the robustness of that conclusion because there would be a lot of parameters and a model that can explain the past, unless extremely simple, is something to be suspicious of until it makes predictions.
We really can't say what happened "regardless of whatever precautions and restrictions..." because we simply didn't observe the other case. It would be interesting if people could voluntarily sign up to a privacy-invading-but-pseudonymous app that would record social contacts, so that we could track that through a pandemic, and see if that is enough to explain the curves. Not practicable here, of course.
--AS
Not much to ask is it?
We're doomed!
I'm sure I heard about something similar but this was divers in a chamber on an oil rig in the path of a typhoon. When I try google it I cant find any evidence though. Makes me think it may have been an invention.
Remember all.the talk of how important Russell Brand endorsement of Miliband was or Stormzy being a big Corbyn fan.
The former nudge unit at #10 were far more successful in influencing public behaviour without anybody really noticing, from increasing prompt payment of taxes to getting people to switch to e-cigs from traditional ones.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcjqNaExUwo
Perhaps I should try it. I can prove why Betfair are being jackasses about paying out, but I need £200,000 for computer tech and to bribe people for it.
*Looks round hopefully*
David Attenborough
Judi Dench
Trevor McDonald
David Walliams
Bradley Wiggins
Jessica Ennis-HIll
Marcus Rashford
Oh, and er... Gary Lineker
To name but a few.
https://twitter.com/PFF_College/status/1332931419140722691?s=19
Her supporters tell me she's really popular with the plebs.
Time she earned her benefits Sovereign Grant.
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MX572ZM/A/apple-mac-pro-wheels-kit
No jealousy here.
Probably because I only have the MacBooks.
I need to start looking at gaming laptops/PCs though, I think I may have to buy a couple in the next year or so.
The issue is exactly representing people. People who don't want to believe x. Given them evidence and they shift to y. Then back to x....
If COVID is a real problem and lockdowns are required - well, it's too big a problem for them. At that point the messenger is the problem...... So, if you get rid of the messenger, then it all goes away.
Tobes
Sumption
Right Said Fred
That mad bird off Loose Women
.
.
.
Piers?
It would certainly shake the anti vaxxers out of the undergrowth.
That might all sound like gobblegook, basically lots of new stuff, but limited supply at the moment and it is showing in the prices. A few months and last gen stuff will be dirt cheap and new gen be huge competition between AMD and Intel / Nvidia, which is great for prices.
£218,111.12 for a pair of 64 core EPYC processors, 1 TB RAM, and 8 A100 GPUs.
https://www.scan.co.uk/3xs/configurator/nvidia-dgx-a100-ai-supercomputer-appliance
That Mac Pro is mere toy in comparison.
That’s what I call resilient...
https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/the-loss-of-the-db29/46764/2
It has happened again - I seem to recall and Iranian accident - to the point that modern practice is that the decompression chamber should be designed to float free of the ship or rig it is on.
Did anyone watching live not immediately think he was dead?
Amazing efforts over the years to make F1 cars and racing safer, that he could walk away from such an utterly horrific accident with only minor burns on his hands, and not a single broken bone in his body.
Survived and stoned on morphine...🤗
It's all symptoms of "I want to believe" - It's all false positives. it's all dodgy graphs, it's better in Sweden, it's an attempt to take of the government, it's an attempt to inject microchips into everyone...
And the answer is...
So long as you're running apps that are compiled for the M1, it's awesome. Stuff that is x64 code that is converted before running is usually good, but seems to fall over when its called upon to use multiple threads. (Brave with a dozen browser tabs open is unusable. Chrome - which is a native M1 binary - is fine.)
USB compatibility seems a bit spotty. There are quite a few peripherals (basically anything more than 18 months old) that don't seem to work.
Playing Steam games, I think only about 20% (Into the Breach) work OK, the other 80% don't. That will hopefully largely be solved as people cross compile.
So...
I wouldn't get it yet, *unless* you live entirely with Apple native apps or in Chrome.
The other issue is that some reviewers have encountered severe throttling under load - at least for the Air - as a way of dealing with thermal management.
Basically I'd rather wait till at least one of us is vaccinated.
TensorFlow users on Intel Macs or Macs powered by Apple’s new M1 chip can now take advantage of accelerated training using Apple’s Mac-optimized version of TensorFlow 2.4 and the new ML Compute framework.
https://blog.tensorflow.org/2020/11/accelerating-tensorflow-performance-on-mac.html?m=1
There are many seeming inconsistencies in the analyses published by ONS or SAGE. E.g., very often their dot and bar estimates on incidence rate versus time and their likelihood contours do not overlap. Both of these are supposed to be 95% intervals, meaning that they are both claimed to have a 95% chance of including the real value. Clearly, (at least) one is not a 95% CL.
2. If the dodgy graphs subsequently proved reliable, that is actually worse news. They made (at least) two errors and they were very lucky that the errors cancelled, or partially cancelled. That might not happen again.
This is a matter of great gravity -- it is perfectly reasonable to expect ONS/SAGE to get the details right. They should have access to the best statisticians, the best computers, the best expertise.
They should be up to the job of presenting a very strong case with watertight, impeccable statistics.
And areas hit hardest in the first wave would have the greatest resistance now (otherwise why did it fall away the first time if it wasn’t the effects of restrictions?)
It has the feel of an attractive myth - that would mean we wouldn’t have to do anything, which is why it would be attractive. I think a lot of proof would be required before most of us would believe it, and it would have to address those enormous variations and the resurgence of the second wave.
It’s like when the opposition calls in the government to publish X
I would just give it x months of development before buying kit.
It also seems that they are changing their lines over starting with the low end machines.
I'm not looking to replace my hardware until there is a good 12 months of this chipset being out, software being ported over etc.
Confidently saying there were no excess deaths this year as the first wave built up. And then not even and “oops, I guess we were wrong.”
Each and every statement on Sweden, since disproved, all of which may never have been said for all they have to say on it.
That the IFR is well below one in a thousand, maybe one in ten thousand. Toby even tried to revive that briefly, using the death figures to make his point as we have to take them into accou... oh. Oops. And now silence there.
Opening schools will have no issues and children don’t even pass on the virus. That aged well.
We can release all restrictions and nothing bad will happen.
There won’t be a second wave.
There’s no point kicking the can down the road, vaccines won’t come along to save us.
There’s no excess deaths THIS time, and here’s a dodgy graph sourced from a conspiracy theorist on Twitter to “prove” it.
Never a single acknowledgement of the repeated wrong nature of any of it, never any hint of an analysis of where they went wrong, always the squeaking sound of goalposts shifting.
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/1327601642880053250
Any evidence you provide or refute will just cause the bullshit stream to move, to flow round it.
Sweden is trending
strongly downwards
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/1333162000810201088/photo/1
I have in the past seen bits and pieces of the TV putting special mics on players or concentrating this directional mics at them, but this is the first time I have seen them just play it over the top of the coverage.