How awesome is Biden, didn’t win Iowa or New Hampshire and will be the nominee.
I was assured he wouldn't get the nomination if he didn't win at least one of those two states.
Actually Bill Clinton won the 1992 nomination winning South Carolina but losing Iowa and New Hampshire, so you need to win one of Iowa, New Hampshire or South Carolina not just Iowa or New Hampshire.
If Biden does win the nomination he will follow Clinton's path built on South Carolina and southern states on Super Tuesday
Clinton did, however, finish a reasonably strong second in New Hampshire in 1992 with 25% to Paul Tsongas' 33% and more than double Bob Kerrey in third; while the Iowa contest that year was meaningless with a home-state candidate.
By contrast, if he wins, Biden would be the first nominee since the 'First In The Nation' Iowa/NH contests became a thing in the 1970s, to gain the nomination without finishing in the top two in either opening state (the record actually goes back much further but it's doubtful how meaningful those earlier years are).
Has a candidate (Biden) ever had such deep and strong support amongst black democrats and such weak fly by night support amongst white democrats who went to Buttigieg/Klobuchar (Then back) at the first sniff of gunpowder ?
It could be a double bluff where he wants people to think so - that would be typical of Trump's childishness that he always imagines as great strategy.
Whilst I don't think Biden is a great candidate, there is absolutely no question in my mind that Trump would prefer Sanders to Biden as an opponent.
Sanders' problem was amply demonstrated by Biden's comeback. Rather like Corbyn, he is congenitally incapable of compromising, apologising, or uniting.
Sanders had every opportunity to put the contest to bed. He needed to use his time as clear frontrunner to praise the moderates (kill them with kindness), make noises about a moderate VP, gently row back on some past comments, and generally say "let's unite on Super Tuesday, then take on Trump together". Instead, he fluffed it and spent his time dancing on moderates' graves and praising Castro. He and his bros have nobody else to blame if, as seems likely, they've lost the race to Biden.
Spot on. Dems need someone who is comfortable having a beer with WWC voters and who can bring in the black vote. Joe, for all his faults, is the guy who can do that. The other Dems are just grist to Trump's mill as was Hillary.
As mentioned previously, I think that was more relevant to the 2016 Sanders than the 2020 one. Sanders has definitely made progress with these voters, but apparently only in the north, not the South. I can't see Biden pulling off the kind of interview below ; but also as mentioned below, Sanders' obstinacy on the socialist issue may have rendered all this moot and wasted work.
Yes, actually quite impressive. Comes across as pretty sassy and likeable. ANd not to be messed with. Can imagine him as a strong supporting character in a Woody Allen film too. Shows why comparison, at least in personal terms, with Corbyn is wrong-headed. Still think point about Biden being best-placed stands though.
Trump isn't remotely scared of Biden, and he doesn't want to face Sanders.
Not because he thinks Biden could beat him and Sanders can't. He's just seen the polling that suggests that Biden backers will en masse vote Sanders over Trump, whereas a sizeable proportion of Sanders backers will sit on their hands rather than vote for anyone else.
He knows that publicly seeming to be backing Sanders doesn't actually help Sanders, and is counting on facing someone else.
You would have thought he'd be more worried about the overall polling averages which show Biden with a better lead over Trumpton than Sanders, but, each to their own I guess.
OT good meta piece by Tyler Cowen on the covid-19 arguments:
Overall, the growthers tend to be analytical people who work a lot with numbers and are used to modeling the problems they face. The mindset in Washington, by contrast — and indeed much of America — is much closer to the base-raters.
The base-raters, when assessing the likelihood of a particular scenario, start by asking how often it has happened before. That is, they estimate its base-rate likelihood. And history shows that major pandemics have lately been rare.
Would not go that far. It's just that he might have passed his "use by" date.
Different people have different "use by" dates. It's not purely about age. Some are fully functional at 90, others lose utility as early as 50.
I would say for "normal" people, the average "use by" age is 58.
For politicians - because they are by definition so robust - it is on average much higher. Something like 75.
But the average does not matter. Each person is an individual. A statistic of one.
I'm not saying he appears to have dementia because he is 77.
I'm saying he appears to have dementia because he can't speak properly. He can't get to the end of the sentence without forgetting how he started. He mixed up his wife with his sister. He announced at a rally he's running for the US Senate. He completely forgot what he was talking about more than once recently. Brain degradation is sad, but Biden is undergoing it.
I'm eating oysters and drinking Picpoul in an otherwise deserted restaurant in Maldon, Essex.
I feel like President Mitterand consuming his final ortolans.
I don't have a coronovirus angle for this but did you make it out to Bradwell and Chapel of St Peter-on-the-Wall?
Going there on Saturday. I hear it is amazing?
Awesome (Lindesfarne of Essex etc) while at the same time simple and charming and the whole area is very weirdly spooky, the dead nuclear power station helps.
Despite being in Essex the area's really remote because it's stuck between the two estuaries, the teachers there used to blame their low position in the league tables on in-breeding.
It's quite near Southminster, who are SECOND in the Essex Vets League Division 3 (East) having been humbled by Top of the Table Hornchurch in their last match
OT good meta piece by Tyler Cowen on the covid-19 arguments:
Overall, the growthers tend to be analytical people who work a lot with numbers and are used to modeling the problems they face. The mindset in Washington, by contrast — and indeed much of America — is much closer to the base-raters.
The base-raters, when assessing the likelihood of a particular scenario, start by asking how often it has happened before. That is, they estimate its base-rate likelihood. And history shows that major pandemics have lately been rare.
In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, on which day will the patch cover half of the lake?
The "lot of fuss about nothing" claim depends heavily on not knowing the right answer to that.
The "shut down the country and airports and cancel all sports and gatherings now" hysteria depends upon not knowing the answer too.
OT good meta piece by Tyler Cowen on the covid-19 arguments:
Overall, the growthers tend to be analytical people who work a lot with numbers and are used to modeling the problems they face. The mindset in Washington, by contrast — and indeed much of America — is much closer to the base-raters.
The base-raters, when assessing the likelihood of a particular scenario, start by asking how often it has happened before. That is, they estimate its base-rate likelihood. And history shows that major pandemics have lately been rare.
Don't the Bayesians start out base-raters and modify their views according to the daily news, though ?
Half right. Bayesians start of with a prior distribution, and then update this distribution it as evidence comes in.
A Bayesian could start with a prior model with a linear increase or a prior model with a exponential increase or a prior model with a logistic curve, depending on your his7her prior belief.
Oh and, the non-Bayesians are called "Frequentists"
It could be a double bluff where he wants people to think so - that would be typical of Trump's childishness that he always imagines as great strategy.
Whilst I don't think Biden is a great candidate, there is absolutely no question in my mind that Trump would prefer Sanders to Biden as an opponent.
Sanders' problem was amply demonstrated by Biden's comeback. Rather like Corbyn, he is congenitally incapable of compromising, apologising, or uniting.
Sanders had every opportunity to put the contest to bed. He needed to use his time as clear frontrunner to praise the moderates (kill them with kindness), make noises about a moderate VP, gently row back on some past comments, and generally say "let's unite on Super Tuesday, then take on Trump together". Instead, he fluffed it and spent his time dancing on moderates' graves and praising Castro. He and his bros have nobody else to blame if, as seems likely, they've lost the race to Biden.
Spot on. Dems need someone who is comfortable having a beer with WWC voters and who can bring in the black vote. Joe, for all his faults, is the guy who can do that. The other Dems are just grist to Trump's mill as was Hillary.
An interesting take last night from a black former congresswoman was that Biden was always the blacks' choice, but they started drifting to Bloomberg when Biden was fluffing it. But when Clyburn stood up with Biden and said "He is a good man. We know him and he knows us", that reassured the voters in South Carolina, they left Bloomberg and returned to their first choice, Biden. Thereby destroying Bloomberg's rationale (the only candidate who can beat Trump), and the rest is history.
This is borne out somewhat from the results - in state after state last night, Bloomberg was doing significantly better and Biden significantly worse in the early voting (the first votes reported in the evening) than voting on the day, indicating a voter reaction to the South Carolina result.
Of course, we'll never know for sure what caused the outcome, but it is an interesting and somewhat compelling narrative.
I'm eating oysters and drinking Picpoul in an otherwise deserted restaurant in Maldon, Essex.
I feel like President Mitterand consuming his final ortolans.
I don't have a coronovirus angle for this but did you make it out to Bradwell and Chapel of St Peter-on-the-Wall?
Going there on Saturday. I hear it is amazing?
Awesome (Lindesfarne of Essex etc) while at the same time simple and charming and the whole area is very weirdly spooky, the dead nuclear power station helps.
Despite being in Essex the area's really remote because it's stuck between the two estuaries, the teachers there used to blame their low position in the league tables on in-breeding.
St Peters on the Wall at Bradwell is indeed quite something Weather looks as it'll be OK, too. It might be a tad early in the year to go because the wildflowers won't yet be in bloom, but you should see a lot of migratory wading birds. It's also quite something at night; can be quite ghostly.
Trump isn't remotely scared of Biden, and he doesn't want to face Sanders.
Not because he thinks Biden could beat him and Sanders can't. He's just seen the polling that suggests that Biden backers will en masse vote Sanders over Trump, whereas a sizeable proportion of Sanders backers will sit on their hands rather than vote for anyone else.
He knows that publicly seeming to be backing Sanders doesn't actually help Sanders, and is counting on facing someone else.
You would have thought he'd be more worried about the overall polling averages which show Biden with a better lead over Trumpton than Sanders, but, each to their own I guess.
Recently that metric has been relatively level, Biden had an awful February though which probably lead to some differential non response bias amongst his supporters. I expect he'll be a couple of points ahead of Sanders from here on out. Americans can't bear to admit they'll vote for a "loser".
Absolute class. He would make a lot more sense than the endless stream of bozos on QT nowadays.
Wenger Klopp Mourinho Warnock Cantona
I'd watch it if that was the panel.
Ummm, isn't he saying that he is exactly the wrong person to be answering questions on QT? He specifically criticises people asking him questions about politics.
OT good meta piece by Tyler Cowen on the covid-19 arguments:
Overall, the growthers tend to be analytical people who work a lot with numbers and are used to modeling the problems they face. The mindset in Washington, by contrast — and indeed much of America — is much closer to the base-raters.
The base-raters, when assessing the likelihood of a particular scenario, start by asking how often it has happened before. That is, they estimate its base-rate likelihood. And history shows that major pandemics have lately been rare.
Absolute class. He would make a lot more sense than the endless stream of bozos on QT nowadays.
Wenger Klopp Mourinho Warnock Cantona
I'd watch it if that was the panel.
Ummm, isn't he saying that he is exactly the wrong person to be answering questions on QT? He specifically criticises people asking him questions about politics.
Absolute class. He would make a lot more sense than the endless stream of bozos on QT nowadays.
Wenger Klopp Mourinho Warnock Cantona
I'd watch it if that was the panel.
Ummm, isn't he saying that he is exactly the wrong person to be answering questions on QT? He specifically criticises people asking him questions about politics.
I think it's a bit like leadership. Those that shy away from it are probably most qualified to do it. I actually think Klopp didn't need to be short with the journalist. Given Liverpool are a team still in Europe, I think it's reasonable to ask for his/the club's perspective on this issue.
... Oh and, the non-Bayesians are called "Frequentists"
Yeah, sorry. I was taught this a bit weirdly, or I've just plain forgotten.
I may be confused in that most of the methods I actually use are Bayesian with a prior estimated from the data, usually called "Empirical Bayes" methods.
Absolute class. He would make a lot more sense than the endless stream of bozos on QT nowadays.
Wenger Klopp Mourinho Warnock Cantona
I'd watch it if that was the panel.
Ummm, isn't he saying that he is exactly the wrong person to be answering questions on QT? He specifically criticises people asking him questions about politics.
I think it's a bit like leadership. Those that shy away from it are probably most qualified to do it. I actually think Klopp didn't need to be short with the journalist. Given Liverpool are a team still in Europe, I think it's reasonable to ask for his/the club's perspective on this issue.
Yeah but if he says "Yes I am worried" lots of Liverpool fans would take that as a sign to be worried, and similarly if he said "nah not really". So I think he is right, what does it matter what he thinks? He doesn't know!
Trump isn't remotely scared of Biden, and he doesn't want to face Sanders.
Not because he thinks Biden could beat him and Sanders can't. He's just seen the polling that suggests that Biden backers will en masse vote Sanders over Trump, whereas a sizeable proportion of Sanders backers will sit on their hands rather than vote for anyone else.
He knows that publicly seeming to be backing Sanders doesn't actually help Sanders, and is counting on facing someone else.
You would have thought he'd be more worried about the overall polling averages which show Biden with a better lead over Trumpton than Sanders, but, each to their own I guess.
He probably is more worried. He's focusing on the variables he can affect, rather than the ones he can't.
Would not go that far. It's just that he might have passed his "use by" date.
Different people have different "use by" dates. It's not purely about age. Some are fully functional at 90, others lose utility as early as 50.
I would say for "normal" people, the average "use by" age is 58.
For politicians - because they are by definition so robust - it is on average much higher. Something like 75.
But the average does not matter. Each person is an individual. A statistic of one.
I'm not saying he appears to have dementia because he is 77.
I'm saying he appears to have dementia because he can't speak properly. He can't get to the end of the sentence without forgetting how he started. He mixed up his wife with his sister. He announced at a rally he's running for the US Senate. He completely forgot what he was talking about more than once recently. Brain degradation is sad, but Biden is undergoing it.
That's really not good, and enough to slow his momentum - but I don't think Sanders has the kind of personal ruthlessness to intend or plan to capitalise on something like that.
Trump isn't remotely scared of Biden, and he doesn't want to face Sanders.
Not because he thinks Biden could beat him and Sanders can't. He's just seen the polling that suggests that Biden backers will en masse vote Sanders over Trump, whereas a sizeable proportion of Sanders backers will sit on their hands rather than vote for anyone else.
He knows that publicly seeming to be backing Sanders doesn't actually help Sanders, and is counting on facing someone else.
You would have thought he'd be more worried about the overall polling averages which show Biden with a better lead over Trumpton than Sanders, but, each to their own I guess.
I think he'd prefer Sanders to win the nomination. Partly I think he personally hates Biden, and doesn't mind Sanders. Partly, I think he would enjoy calling Sanders a commie, and getting the backing of all his fellow billionaires (unlike last time when some of them backed Clinton, which hurt). But the best outcome is for Trump is where Sanders wins a plurality of the delegates but the nomination is "stolen" by the Dem establishment, which is the narrative he's trying to support.
OT good meta piece by Tyler Cowen on the covid-19 arguments:
Overall, the growthers tend to be analytical people who work a lot with numbers and are used to modeling the problems they face. The mindset in Washington, by contrast — and indeed much of America — is much closer to the base-raters.
The base-raters, when assessing the likelihood of a particular scenario, start by asking how often it has happened before. That is, they estimate its base-rate likelihood. And history shows that major pandemics have lately been rare.
Absolute class. He would make a lot more sense than the endless stream of bozos on QT nowadays.
Wenger Klopp Mourinho Warnock Cantona
I'd watch it if that was the panel.
Ummm, isn't he saying that he is exactly the wrong person to be answering questions on QT? He specifically criticises people asking him questions about politics.
I think it's a bit like leadership. Those that shy away from it are probably most qualified to do it. I actually think Klopp didn't need to be short with the journalist. Given Liverpool are a team still in Europe, I think it's reasonable to ask for his/the club's perspective on this issue.
Yeah but if he says "Yes I am worried" lots of Liverpool fans would take that as a sign to be worried, and similarly if he said "nah not really". So I think he is right, what does it matter what he thinks? He doesn't know!
The good news is that from such a response we can rule out the possibility that he is posting on PB under the name of @eadric.
OT good meta piece by Tyler Cowen on the covid-19 arguments:
Overall, the growthers tend to be analytical people who work a lot with numbers and are used to modeling the problems they face. The mindset in Washington, by contrast — and indeed much of America — is much closer to the base-raters.
The base-raters, when assessing the likelihood of a particular scenario, start by asking how often it has happened before. That is, they estimate its base-rate likelihood. And history shows that major pandemics have lately been rare.
In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, on which day will the patch cover half of the lake?
The "lot of fuss about nothing" claim depends heavily on not knowing the right answer to that.
The "shut down the country and airports and cancel all sports and gatherings now" hysteria depends upon not knowing the answer too.
Quite. Because 15/16 of the lake's surface is still ABSOLUTELY CLEAR, do you hear me? And there is *nothing* more irrational than taking steps now, to prevent undesirable consequences in future.
I'm hearing the suggestions you refer to mainly from the government's scientific advisors, and they don't sound that hysterical to me.
South Korea seems to have the best testing regime of anywhere. Possibly take their mortality rate then multiply it through to find the "true" case rate globally ?
35 deaths from 5621 cases is 0.6%
Implies for instance 12,700 Iran cases; 479,000 Chinese cases; 963 Diamond Princess cases (Broadly in line with the S Korea numbers);
OT good meta piece by Tyler Cowen on the covid-19 arguments:
Overall, the growthers tend to be analytical people who work a lot with numbers and are used to modeling the problems they face. The mindset in Washington, by contrast — and indeed much of America — is much closer to the base-raters.
The base-raters, when assessing the likelihood of a particular scenario, start by asking how often it has happened before. That is, they estimate its base-rate likelihood. And history shows that major pandemics have lately been rare.
In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, on which day will the patch cover half of the lake?
The "lot of fuss about nothing" claim depends heavily on not knowing the right answer to that.
The "shut down the country and airports and cancel all sports and gatherings now" hysteria depends upon not knowing the answer too.
The point of cancelling large gatherings is that doubling in size is not a given, you can add stuff to the water that makes it less friendly to lilies. Unfortunately they grow under the water where you can't see them before they show up on top, so you have to add it to all the water in the lake, even though most of the water doesn't yet have lilies in it.
OT good meta piece by Tyler Cowen on the covid-19 arguments:
Overall, the growthers tend to be analytical people who work a lot with numbers and are used to modeling the problems they face. The mindset in Washington, by contrast — and indeed much of America — is much closer to the base-raters.
The base-raters, when assessing the likelihood of a particular scenario, start by asking how often it has happened before. That is, they estimate its base-rate likelihood. And history shows that major pandemics have lately been rare.
In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, on which day will the patch cover half of the lake?
The "lot of fuss about nothing" claim depends heavily on not knowing the right answer to that.
The "shut down the country and airports and cancel all sports and gatherings now" hysteria depends upon not knowing the answer too.
The point of cancelling large gatherings is that doubling in size is not a given, you can add stuff to the water that makes it less friendly to lilies. Unfortunately they grow under the water where you can't see them before they show up on top, so you have to add it to all the water in the lake, even though most of the water doesn't yet have lilies in it.
I will refuse to believe that the government is taking the threat seriously until they close down the tube in London at the very least (and the rail network arguably after that).
I see the right are still being trigged by James O'Brien then.
Does "triggered by" mean "ripping the piss out of"?
Well, your chap Kristian Niemietz does seem positively obsessed.
He posted something ironically a couple of days before and The Poke fell for it, leading for him to be inundated with it hilarious "abuse" it seems. Way before O'Brien put his foot in it. (in fact it seems O'Brien's tweet was a rip off from Otto English! Only just seen that, brilliant)
We've now imported 80 cases, Italy and Iran must have an awful lot of cases to be exporting so many.
I reckon the true number in Italy is about 10,000 cases. Iran may be much higher - not convinced the deaths there are being reported accurately.
Sooner or later we're going to be importing large numbers of cases from the US if they continue with the ostrich act they are currently engaged in.
Given the long incubation period, and the large number of people who travel from the US to the UK on a daily basis, I suspect it is already well underway.
I'm eating oysters and drinking Picpoul in an otherwise deserted restaurant in Maldon, Essex.
I feel like President Mitterand consuming his final ortolans.
I don't have a coronovirus angle for this but did you make it out to Bradwell and Chapel of St Peter-on-the-Wall?
Going there on Saturday. I hear it is amazing?
Awesome (Lindesfarne of Essex etc) while at the same time simple and charming and the whole area is very weirdly spooky, the dead nuclear power station helps.
Despite being in Essex the area's really remote because it's stuck between the two estuaries, the teachers there used to blame their low position in the league tables on in-breeding.
St Peters on the Wall at Bradwell is indeed quite something Weather looks as it'll be OK, too. It might be a tad early in the year to go because the wildflowers won't yet be in bloom, but you should see a lot of migratory wading birds. It's also quite something at night; can be quite ghostly.
I once watched a bird come in off the sea at Bradwell, and was delighted as a hungry Hoopoe landed not ten feet from me and started to feed up.
There are five and a half months from now until the Republican convention which will determine who Betfair pay out on as the Republican nominee. What could possibly go wrong? Trump can be laid at 1.06. He has already asked whether he could nuke a hurricane and use a flu vaccine against the coronavirus. He is the most iconic president since JFK, in a country where the median age is 38. "The President and the Land are One" is what he will have to go for, and it won't work.
My best model (logistic) predicts near-universal infection by early May, ~11 million deaths in the US by the summer. Can they hold e-conventions?
Would you mind posting your projections for what numbers in the UK might look like, please?
I see the right are still being trigged by James O'Brien then.
Does "triggered by" mean "ripping the piss out of"?
Well, your chap Kristian Niemietz does seem positively obsessed.
He posted something ironically a couple of days before and The Poke fell for it, leading for him to be inundated with it hilarious "abuse" it seems. Way before O'Brien put his foot in it. (in fact it seems O'Brien's tweet was a rip off from Otto English! Only just seen that, brilliant)
There are five and a half months from now until the Republican convention which will determine who Betfair pay out on as the Republican nominee. What could possibly go wrong? Trump can be laid at 1.06. He has already asked whether he could nuke a hurricane and use a flu vaccine against the coronavirus. He is the most iconic president since JFK, in a country where the median age is 38. "The President and the Land are One" is what he will have to go for, and it won't work.
My best model (logistic) predicts near-universal infection by early May, ~11 million deaths in the US by the summer. Can they hold e-conventions?
Would you mind posting your projections for what numbers in the UK might look like, please?
It’ll surely be another permutation of our Panicminder in Chief’s 2 million
We've now imported 80 cases, Italy and Iran must have an awful lot of cases to be exporting so many.
I reckon the true number in Italy is about 10,000 cases. Iran may be much higher - not convinced the deaths there are being reported accurately.
Sooner or later we're going to be importing large numbers of cases from the US if they continue with the ostrich act they are currently engaged in.
TBF they do finally seem to be swinging into gear. But surely too late. All those Americans worrying about the risks of their planned European holiday from late spring onwards may find the problem is they are not allowed in.
OT good meta piece by Tyler Cowen on the covid-19 arguments:
Overall, the growthers tend to be analytical people who work a lot with numbers and are used to modeling the problems they face. The mindset in Washington, by contrast — and indeed much of America — is much closer to the base-raters.
The base-raters, when assessing the likelihood of a particular scenario, start by asking how often it has happened before. That is, they estimate its base-rate likelihood. And history shows that major pandemics have lately been rare.
In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, on which day will the patch cover half of the lake?
The "lot of fuss about nothing" claim depends heavily on not knowing the right answer to that.
The "shut down the country and airports and cancel all sports and gatherings now" hysteria depends upon not knowing the answer too.
The point of cancelling large gatherings is that doubling in size is not a given, you can add stuff to the water that makes it less friendly to lilies. Unfortunately they grow under the water where you can't see them before they show up on top, so you have to add it to all the water in the lake, even though most of the water doesn't yet have lilies in it.
The expert on this morning’s radio said that at a large open air sporting event, at most you’re likely to infect the people either side of you. Whereas if you cancel the event and everyone goes to the pub or round to their mates to watch it indoors on TV, the risk is probably magnified. So it’s no sport or nothing. If you see what I mean.
Or you could have this, but only monitoring for the symptoms, which is too late:
There are five and a half months from now until the Republican convention which will determine who Betfair pay out on as the Republican nominee. What could possibly go wrong? Trump can be laid at 1.06. He has already asked whether he could nuke a hurricane and use a flu vaccine against the coronavirus. He is the most iconic president since JFK, in a country where the median age is 38. "The President and the Land are One" is what he will have to go for, and it won't work.
My best model (logistic) predicts near-universal infection by early May, ~11 million deaths in the US by the summer. Can they hold e-conventions?
Would you mind posting your projections for what numbers in the UK might look like, please?
It’ll surely be another permutation of our Panicminder in Chief’s 2 million
I think any "model" that "predicts" "near-universal infection by early May" we can safely chuck in the bin. I'm sure the "model" accounts very accurately for the falling off of cases in China.
I'm eating oysters and drinking Picpoul in an otherwise deserted restaurant in Maldon, Essex.
I feel like President Mitterand consuming his final ortolans.
I don't have a coronovirus angle for this but did you make it out to Bradwell and Chapel of St Peter-on-the-Wall?
Going there on Saturday. I hear it is amazing?
Awesome (Lindesfarne of Essex etc) while at the same time simple and charming and the whole area is very weirdly spooky, the dead nuclear power station helps.
Despite being in Essex the area's really remote because it's stuck between the two estuaries, the teachers there used to blame their low position in the league tables on in-breeding.
St Peters on the Wall at Bradwell is indeed quite something Weather looks as it'll be OK, too. It might be a tad early in the year to go because the wildflowers won't yet be in bloom, but you should see a lot of migratory wading birds. It's also quite something at night; can be quite ghostly.
I once watched a bird come in off the sea at Bradwell, and was delighted as a hungry Hoopoe landed not ten feet from me and started to feed up.
Also saw a short-toed treecreeper there.
Not surprised that hoopoe was hungry. Probably blown north from France. Not seen one in Essex, although I know they do get here now and then.
There are five and a half months from now until the Republican convention which will determine who Betfair pay out on as the Republican nominee. What could possibly go wrong? Trump can be laid at 1.06. He has already asked whether he could nuke a hurricane and use a flu vaccine against the coronavirus. He is the most iconic president since JFK, in a country where the median age is 38. "The President and the Land are One" is what he will have to go for, and it won't work.
My best model (logistic) predicts near-universal infection by early May, ~11 million deaths in the US by the summer. Can they hold e-conventions?
Would you mind posting your projections for what numbers in the UK might look like, please?
It’ll surely be another permutation of our Panicminder in Chief’s 2 million
I think any "model" that "predicts" "near-universal infection by early May" we can safely chuck in the bin. I'm sure the "model" accounts very accurately for the falling off of cases in China.
the question I always ask - are they testing enough? A falling measured infection rate doesn't mean the infection rate is falling.
OT good meta piece by Tyler Cowen on the covid-19 arguments:
Overall, the growthers tend to be analytical people who work a lot with numbers and are used to modeling the problems they face. The mindset in Washington, by contrast — and indeed much of America — is much closer to the base-raters.
The base-raters, when assessing the likelihood of a particular scenario, start by asking how often it has happened before. That is, they estimate its base-rate likelihood. And history shows that major pandemics have lately been rare.
In a lake, there is a patch of lily pads. Every day, the patch doubles in size. If it takes 48 days for the patch to cover the entire lake, on which day will the patch cover half of the lake?
The "lot of fuss about nothing" claim depends heavily on not knowing the right answer to that.
The "shut down the country and airports and cancel all sports and gatherings now" hysteria depends upon not knowing the answer too.
The point of cancelling large gatherings is that doubling in size is not a given, you can add stuff to the water that makes it less friendly to lilies. Unfortunately they grow under the water where you can't see them before they show up on top, so you have to add it to all the water in the lake, even though most of the water doesn't yet have lilies in it.
The UK is in a better position than most countries because we're doing more testing, which means the information we have to make judgements on is only ~14 days out of date rather than ~21, but we can still mess this up by waiting too long to take sensible preventative measures.
Seems a bit stupid. If there are clusters, why would you not want people to know about them and decide against going to them?
Well if you listen to the freshest conspiracy theories - a cluster has been found at a London hospital where a patient was in an open ward for a week. Would make sense that they'd want to delay the release of that information for a few hours while they figure out how to control the messaging.
Death rates for countries with over 100 reported cases :
USA 7.0% China 3.7% Italy 3.2% Iran 3.1% Japan 1.9% France 1.9% Hong Kong 1.9% Diamond Princess 0.8% S Korea 0.6% Spain 0.5% Germany 0% Singapore 0%
What’s the worth of these statistics when you can only get a test in the USA by looking likely to die within the hour?
See my previous points, this illustrates them the other way round. The USA is a whopping huge outlier on the top, likely infection there is probably at least 400 cases if not more.
There are five and a half months from now until the Republican convention which will determine who Betfair pay out on as the Republican nominee. What could possibly go wrong? Trump can be laid at 1.06. He has already asked whether he could nuke a hurricane and use a flu vaccine against the coronavirus. He is the most iconic president since JFK, in a country where the median age is 38. "The President and the Land are One" is what he will have to go for, and it won't work.
My best model (logistic) predicts near-universal infection by early May, ~11 million deaths in the US by the summer. Can they hold e-conventions?
Would you mind posting your projections for what numbers in the UK might look like, please?
It’ll surely be another permutation of our Panicminder in Chief’s 2 million
I think any "model" that "predicts" "near-universal infection by early May" we can safely chuck in the bin. I'm sure the "model" accounts very accurately for the falling off of cases in China.
the question I always ask - are they testing enough? A falling measured infection rate doesn't mean the infection rate is falling.
True, but either there are millions of untested cases in China, in which case the death rate starts looking much lower, or the rate of new infections isn't following some so-called "model"
Though may be in part increased testing in Monday.
Dr Foxy not a happy bunny.
Now 6 cases in London where I am, compared with 4 in South Tyrol, Italy where I am going skiing on Saturday. I'll feel safer on a wide open piste than on the tube.
After watching the press conference yesterday I was largely reassured by our strategy.
However, I really do not understand why the egg chasing is going ahead this weekend.
If cancelling that gave us another week of respite then I think most in the country would take that.
Thoughts?
Sorry to bang on about it but perhaps the most efficient transmission vector for this disease is the London Underground. If they are going to cancel a sports event with 80,000-odd people in the fresh air then they should cancel the tube also which carries 2m people per day in an intimately enclosed space.
Oh and the gyms because those are surely a hotbed of disease transmission. And...and...
No point with the marquee events. If the risk is such that they want to stop the spread they must take the appropriate steps and that means go big.
Though may be in part increased testing in Monday.
Dr Foxy not a happy bunny.
Now 6 cases in London where I am, compared with 4 in South Tyrol, Italy where I am going skiing on Saturday. I'll feel safer on a wide open piste than on the tube.
*Known* cases...
Edit: But your tube v open pistes point is certainly valid...
Though may be in part increased testing in Monday.
Dr Foxy not a happy bunny.
Now 6 cases in London where I am, compared with 4 in South Tyrol, Italy where I am going skiing on Saturday. I'll feel safer on a wide open piste than on the tube.
Though may be in part increased testing in Monday.
Dr Foxy not a happy bunny.
Now 6 cases in London where I am, compared with 4 in South Tyrol, Italy where I am going skiing on Saturday. I'll feel safer on a wide open piste than on the tube.
*Known* cases...
Edit: But your tube v open pistes point is certainly valid...
Yep. I don't know anything about the unknown cases so can't judge.
Comments
Satire is dead.
Absolute class. He would make a lot more sense than the endless stream of bozos on QT nowadays.
Klopp
Mourinho
Warnock
Cantona
I'd watch it if that was the panel.
Colin could start a row in an empty house.
He really should have received a lifetime ban for the battle of Bramall Lane.
http://fulltime-league.thefa.com/ProcessPublicSelect.do?psSelectedSeason=485569166&psSelectedDivision=25629240&psSelectedCompetition=0&psSelectedLeague=2025888
http://fulltime-league.thefa.com/DisplayFixture.do?id=19541112
Burnham vs Southminster in the Cup Saturday if @eadric is bored
The "lot of fuss about nothing" claim depends heavily on not knowing the right answer to that.
The "shut down the country and airports and cancel all sports and gatherings now" hysteria depends upon not knowing the answer too.
A Bayesian could start with a prior model with a linear increase or a prior model with a exponential increase or a prior model with a logistic curve, depending on your his7her prior belief.
Oh and, the non-Bayesians are called "Frequentists"
This is borne out somewhat from the results - in state after state last night, Bloomberg was doing significantly better and Biden significantly worse in the early voting (the first votes reported in the evening) than voting on the day, indicating a voter reaction to the South Carolina result.
Of course, we'll never know for sure what caused the outcome, but it is an interesting and somewhat compelling narrative.
It's also quite something at night; can be quite ghostly.
I expect he'll be a couple of points ahead of Sanders from here on out. Americans can't bear to admit they'll vote for a "loser".
Are mental illnesses contagious ?
Though may be in part increased testing in Monday.
Dr Foxy not a happy bunny.
Although neither base-raters nor growthers can really cope with Black Swans.
Just under 3,000 tests. 29 travel, 3 community + 2 Scottish travel.
I may be confused in that most of the methods I actually use are Bayesian with a prior estimated from the data, usually called "Empirical Bayes" methods.
What we need is this. Gotta admire the Koreans:
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1235077388129759233?s=19
But the best outcome is for Trump is where Sanders wins a plurality of the delegates but the nomination is "stolen" by the Dem establishment, which is the narrative he's trying to support.
But yes, I wouldn't go myself.
Quite. Because 15/16 of the lake's surface is still ABSOLUTELY CLEAR, do you hear me? And there is *nothing* more irrational than taking steps now, to prevent undesirable consequences in future.
I'm hearing the suggestions you refer to mainly from the government's scientific advisors, and they don't sound that hysterical to me.
35 deaths from 5621 cases is 0.6%
Implies for instance 12,700 Iran cases; 479,000 Chinese cases; 963 Diamond Princess cases (Broadly in line with the S Korea numbers);
https://www.thepoke.co.uk/2020/03/03/brexiters-breakfast-claim-left-him-with-egg-on-his-face/
This seems like wise advice, but O'Brien and the disciples just cant bring themselves to take it
https://twitter.com/K_Niemietz/status/1234609405070585856?s=20
Also saw a short-toed treecreeper there.
I’ve laid him again a bit at that.
USA 7.0%
China 3.7%
Italy 3.2%
Iran 3.1%
Japan 1.9%
France 1.9%
Hong Kong 1.9%
Diamond Princess 0.8%
S Korea 0.6%
Spain 0.5%
Germany 0%
Singapore 0%
https://twitter.com/godblesstoto/status/1234933269461901313?s=20
Or you could have this, but only monitoring for the symptoms, which is too late:
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/football/11075044/serie-a-atalanta-lecce-fans-coronavirus/
However, I really do not understand why the egg chasing is going ahead this weekend.
If cancelling that gave us another week of respite then I think most in the country would take that.
Thoughts?
Oh and the gyms because those are surely a hotbed of disease transmission. And...and...
No point with the marquee events. If the risk is such that they want to stop the spread they must take the appropriate steps and that means go big.
Edit: But your tube v open pistes point is certainly valid...