politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov finds little evidence of people wanting to ease the loc
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov finds little evidence of people wanting to ease the lockdown
So far at least, if the polling above has this right, there is no real desire amongst the public in the UK to ease some of the lockdown restrictions. Every suggestion of things being eased in the poll found the majority of respondents wanting things to stay as they are.
Comments
-
My sister has been turning up for a class of 20 kids from key workers and finding 2-3 there.
Oh, is that a first??0 -
2nd even0
-
Second is the new first.0
-
As i said yesterday - my company has extended our WAH period until July at least0
-
Third is the new second?MarqueeMark said:Second is the new first.
0 -
According to Labour anywayMarqueeMark said:Second is the new first.
2 -
Arses have been put into gear...MaxPB said:@MarqueeMark and @bigjohnowls I'm not doing any long term forecasting, it's a predictive tool for date of death from 4 days worth of data at the moment, I want to bring that down to 3 or even 2. From Monday I'm off work so I'm going to sit down and put the data into a proper analytics suite (GCP) but it will only get me so far. Without the full line by line dataset it's not really possible to make any real long term predictions. My worry is that the government is using some very outdated predictive modelling and basing it on influenza.
I'd love to have at the full dataset and create an ML model which would feed in age, sex, location, ethnicity, severity of pre-existing conditions and local travel data to get a pretty good estimate of where this is heading.
https://epcced.github.io/ramp/
0 -
The daughter of a friend of mine who is a primary school teacher has been finding the same. People are simply not willing to risk their kids attending school even when it is available. Similarly, can anyone imagine going (as opposed to missing) to a busy pub and pushing your way to the bar? Just not going to happen whether these restrictions are removed or not.
Much more practical is back to work in construction, offices, courts (please) and other environments where social distancing can largely if not completely be maintained.0 -
OGH: "Given how few things there are to bet on at the moment I was expecting betting markets on the timescale of the shutdown"
Too complicated as it's quite likely to be a phased/limited/geographical/age-related relaxation of the shutdown.0 -
-
My father was a heavy smoker and the last years of his life were awful, struggling to walk any distance, struggling to get to social and family events, vegetating. I have at least as great a fear of living like that as I do of dying.eadric said:FPT for DavidL
Yeah, long term health problems are being neglected (perhaps understandably)
I now have several friends who have been through covid-19, and they all report - like me, if I had it - a lingering weakness/tightness in the lungs.
Also, see this
https://twitter.com/fitzfun2011/status/1252869321832845313?s=210 -
I won the argument.....Floater said:1 -
That's good news, it's become clear that the government's advisory body isn't fit for purpose and there are a lot of resources in the private sector for predictive modelling that can be used. I also think that their prerequisite of asking for people with pandemic modelling is incorrect. People who go in with assumptions are going to come up with incorrect conclusions, one of those assumptions will be wrong and the decision making process will be compromised. I've found the best investment managers have no economic background and the best data modellers don't need specific experience working in one sector or another and can work with any data.FrancisUrquhart said:
Arses have been put into gear...MaxPB said:@MarqueeMark and @bigjohnowls I'm not doing any long term forecasting, it's a predictive tool for date of death from 4 days worth of data at the moment, I want to bring that down to 3 or even 2. From Monday I'm off work so I'm going to sit down and put the data into a proper analytics suite (GCP) but it will only get me so far. Without the full line by line dataset it's not really possible to make any real long term predictions. My worry is that the government is using some very outdated predictive modelling and basing it on influenza.
I'd love to have at the full dataset and create an ML model which would feed in age, sex, location, ethnicity, severity of pre-existing conditions and local travel data to get a pretty good estimate of where this is heading.
https://epcced.github.io/ramp/
0 -
For an example of what an "eased" lockdown might look like: here's mine.
I'm about to leave home for a walk (1,000 sq ft flat) for the first time in 25 days.
Shops are opening, up to 30% capacity, queuing system in car parks, masks compulsory in public spaces and thermometers at entrances.
Small family gatherings allowed at home (no more than 5 people).
Some sectors allowed back to work (including mine), offices to be no more more than 30% occupied.
All entertainment venues remain closed, bars and restaurants open with restricted capacity, buffet food still banned.
Curfew from 10pm-6am
Previous restrictions (which lasted three weeks) were much tighter than UK - needed permission from police to go out, and all shops were closed except food shops and pharmacies.
https://www.thenational.ae/uae/government/coronavirus-dubai-lifts-permit-restrictions-to-allow-shopping-and-exercise-1.1010340
Oh, and "Ramadan Kareem" to all PBers of the Islamic faith, today marks the start of the Holy Month in the muslim calendar.1 -
When was the rest of the country showing that pattern? The grey area?DougSeal said:0 -
Yes. Many people are enjoying it. And with most of those who aren't, or who are very concerned about the economy, the message that it is saving lives RIGHT NOW will still be in the box seat.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.0 -
My son's school did an interesting questionnaire recently about fees for this term where there is some teaching online. From a range of options 40 odd per cent were content to pay the existing fees. I suspect that they were a combination of the rich and those who are not financially affected (there are a lot of doctors kids at the school). The next largest was those seeking a 20% discount which included me. Some went for smaller increases and about 70 are seeking bursaries on the basis that they can no longer afford the fees at all.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.
Which shows that the economic impact of this is currently very uneven and it is very likely to become even more so going forward.0 -
MaxPB said:
That's good news, it's become clear that the government's advisory body isn't fit for purpose and there are a lot of resources in the private sector for predictive modelling that can be used. I also think that their prerequisite of asking for people with pandemic modelling is incorrect. People who go in with assumptions are going to come up with incorrect conclusions, one of those assumptions will be wrong and the decision making process will be compromised. I've found the best investment managers have no economic background and the best data modellers don't need specific experience working in one sector or another and can work with any data.
The more I read about the modelling, I was shocked just how out of date most of the techniques (and code) they are were utilizing was. They seem totally unaware of lots of modern ML techniques, such as Gaussian Processes (and no that isn't just fitting a Gaussian to some data).
Seems like a real lack of multi-disciplinary cross pollination of ideas has gone on.
The UW model is an absolute shit show on so many levels...and that is one apparently the US government thinks is good.0 -
I don't think this represents anything meaningful. My wife is a key worker so my children could go to school, but I'm not so they don't. The advice our school has given is that you can send them to school but that schools are a last resort only if you have no alternative.DavidL said:My sister has been turning up for a class of 20 kids from key workers and finding 2-3 there.
Oh, is that a first??
The moment schools reopen as normal I will start taking them and not a day later. But it would be irresponsible to take them today when I have an alternative solution.0 -
Quite. At the moment it is uneconomic to make anyone redundant when you can furlough them. I’ve been advising my employer clients that it’s pointless making anyone redundant at the moment. Many are just waiting until July to do it.kinabalu said:
Yes. Many people are enjoying it. And with most of those who aren't, or who are very concerned about the economy, the message that it is saving lives RIGHT NOW will still be in the box seat.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.1 -
Best article today IMO, by Philip Collins, (behind the Times paywall).
"Johnson’s tragedy is that he has no safe option
Every political decision means weighing costs and benefits but rarely are the choices as grim as those the PM faces no" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/johnsons-tragedy-is-that-he-has-no-safe-option-3qgq9kgfn1 -
Well 120 days is around 4 monthseadric said:FPT anabobazina posted this interesting remark
2:55PM
Is there now some evidence that this thing peaks after 60 days and burns out after 120?
Hmm.
*****
Could that be right or is it too much to ask?
Ok I’m off for my legal daily0 -
What a chump, hopefully Vodafone sue him into oblivion.Richard_Nabavi said:1 -
The 20 odd kids were supposed to be those whose parents were both key workers or who were on free school meals and looking for lunch. I think people are genuinely scared, not only for their kids but also for what their kids might bring home.Philip_Thompson said:
I don't think this represents anything meaningful. My wife is a key worker so my children could go to school, but I'm not so they don't. The advice our school has given is that you can send them to school but that schools are a last resort only if you have no alternative.DavidL said:My sister has been turning up for a class of 20 kids from key workers and finding 2-3 there.
Oh, is that a first??
The moment schools reopen as normal I will start taking them and not a day later. But it would be irresponsible to take them today when I have an alternative solution.0 -
As has been said on here for a while, the process by which the lockdown occurred was pretty much entirely science-driven.Andy_JS said:Best article today IMO, by Philip Collins, (behind the Times paywall).
"Johnson’s tragedy is that he has no safe option
Every political decision means weighing costs and benefits but rarely are the choices as grim as those the PM faces no" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/johnsons-tragedy-is-that-he-has-no-safe-option-3qgq9kgfn
The process by which is is relaxed, however, is a much more political process, with ministers needing to weigh up the various scientific, economic and health factors (including health factors caused by the lockdown) to come to a conclusion.0 -
Seems like a stand-up kind of guy...Richard_Nabavi said:
"He claims to have at one point advised central bankers in the Congo and Bangladesh on cryptocurrencies and he has posed with the South African president, Cyril Ramaphosa. In 2018 he was working as an economic adviser for a Zimbabwean opposition party, urging it to save the economy using Bitcoin-type products pegged to diamond deposits through blockchain technology."0 -
Most English schools are voluntarily reducing fees. Prep schools around 15-20%, public schools more (Eton 30% for example).DavidL said:
My son's school did an interesting questionnaire recently about fees for this term where there is some teaching online. From a range of options 40 odd per cent were content to pay the existing fees. I suspect that they were a combination of the rich and those who are not financially affected (there are a lot of doctors kids at the school). The next largest was those seeking a 20% discount which included me. Some went for smaller increases and about 70 are seeking bursaries on the basis that they can no longer afford the fees at all.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.
Which shows that the economic impact of this is currently very uneven and it is very likely to become even more so going forward.0 -
Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=200 -
The more I read about the modelling, I was shocked just how out of date most of the techniques (and code) they are were utilizing was. They seem totally unaware of lots of modern ML techniques, such as Gaussian Processes (and no that isn't just fitting a Gaussian to some data).FrancisUrquhart said:MaxPB said:
That's good news, it's become clear that the government's advisory body isn't fit for purpose and there are a lot of resources in the private sector for predictive modelling that can be used. I also think that their prerequisite of asking for people with pandemic modelling is incorrect. People who go in with assumptions are going to come up with incorrect conclusions, one of those assumptions will be wrong and the decision making process will be compromised. I've found the best investment managers have no economic background and the best data modellers don't need specific experience working in one sector or another and can work with any data.
Seems like a real lack of multi-disciplinary cross pollination of ideas has gone on.
The UW model is an absolute shit show on so many levels...and that is one apparently the US government thinks is good.
Yes, the first thing that came to mind was to create an ML model with all of those inputs I mentioned and train it with the existing data we have from end of March to middle of April and then see how well it predicts the end of March outcomes. I'm really shocked that no one is doing this, the modelling teams seem stuck in the dark ages.0 -
Private schools are going to have a total nightmare. They are still incurring the vast majority of their costs during lockdown, lessons-from-home technology is an additional cost, and when lessons resume their variable costs are pretty much all staff salaries.TOPPING said:
Most English schools are voluntarily reducing fees. Prep schools around 15-20%, public schools more (Eton 30% for example).DavidL said:
My son's school did an interesting questionnaire recently about fees for this term where there is some teaching online. From a range of options 40 odd per cent were content to pay the existing fees. I suspect that they were a combination of the rich and those who are not financially affected (there are a lot of doctors kids at the school). The next largest was those seeking a 20% discount which included me. Some went for smaller increases and about 70 are seeking bursaries on the basis that they can no longer afford the fees at all.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.
Which shows that the economic impact of this is currently very uneven and it is very likely to become even more so going forward.
Most private schools (outside the top 'public' schools) operate as charities and don't have a lot of profit margin, savings or endowments.0 -
I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories:
- Stockholm
- Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million.
(1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.0 -
Nothing wrong with old code. Old techniques, definitely.FrancisUrquhart said:
The more I read about the modelling, I was shocked just how out of date most of the techniques (and code) they are were utilizing was. They seem totally unaware of lots of modern ML techniques, such as Gaussian Processes (and no that isn't just fitting a Gaussian to some data).
Seems like a real lack of multi-disciplinary cross pollination of ideas has gone on.
The UW model is an absolute shit show on so many levels...and that is one apparently the US government thinks is good.
Edit: totally bollocksed up the blockquotes there. Not sure who's that quote belongs to.0 -
That to me looks like massive under reporting outside of Stockholm. The whole nation seems like it's in denial about their course of action.Andy_Cooke said:I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories:
- Stockholm
- Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million.
(1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.0 -
We are getting our 20% which is welcome as income has collapsed.TOPPING said:
Most English schools are voluntarily reducing fees. Prep schools around 15-20%, public schools more (Eton 30% for example).DavidL said:
My son's school did an interesting questionnaire recently about fees for this term where there is some teaching online. From a range of options 40 odd per cent were content to pay the existing fees. I suspect that they were a combination of the rich and those who are not financially affected (there are a lot of doctors kids at the school). The next largest was those seeking a 20% discount which included me. Some went for smaller increases and about 70 are seeking bursaries on the basis that they can no longer afford the fees at all.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.
Which shows that the economic impact of this is currently very uneven and it is very likely to become even more so going forward.0 -
From your illegal not actually staying at home.eadric said:FPT anabobazina posted this interesting remark
2:55PM
Is there now some evidence that this thing peaks after 60 days and burns out after 120?
Hmm.
*****
Could that be right or is it too much to ask?
Ok I’m off for my legal daily0 -
Since 13 years ago, when Mr Imperial's model was coded, we have gone through a revolution in ML taking things from being able to solve toy problems to complex real world things. And not just the well publicised deep learning neural network stuff, but things like Gaussian Processes, Bayesian optimization, yadda yadda yadda.RobD said:
Nothing wrong with old code. Old techniques, definitely.
And due to their widespread use, highly optimized libraries are available for most of them, if nothing else to build out from.0 -
-
Agreed, but there's nothing intrinsically wrong with old code. Old methods certainly!FrancisUrquhart said:
Since 13 years ago, when Mr Imperial's model was coded, we have gone through a revolution in ML taking things from being able to solve toy problems to complex real world things. And not just the well publicised deep learning neural network stuff, but things like Gaussian Processes.RobD said:
Nothing wrong with old code. Old techniques, definitely.
And due to their widespread use, highly optimized libraries are available for most of them, if nothing else to build out from.0 -
FTPT
As I said at the time intensive care cases was the canary in the coalmine that Sweden had not peaked.Alistair said:Swedish cases per day
Peak hard to spot there - in part because Sweden has horrific weekend reporting artifacts.
New Intensive Care per day
Slight decline? But the data is still lagged here even if nore up to date than deaths
Deaths per Day
April 8th "Peak" not looking great0 -
That'll get the PPE supplies in.Scott_xP said:2 -
As I have said they are becoming creative. Eton, for example, is making its remote learning package available to state schools also.Sandpit said:
Private schools are going to have a total nightmare. They are still incurring the vast majority of their costs during lockdown, lessons-from-home technology is an additional cost, and when lessons resume their variable costs are pretty much all staff salaries.TOPPING said:
Most English schools are voluntarily reducing fees. Prep schools around 15-20%, public schools more (Eton 30% for example).DavidL said:
My son's school did an interesting questionnaire recently about fees for this term where there is some teaching online. From a range of options 40 odd per cent were content to pay the existing fees. I suspect that they were a combination of the rich and those who are not financially affected (there are a lot of doctors kids at the school). The next largest was those seeking a 20% discount which included me. Some went for smaller increases and about 70 are seeking bursaries on the basis that they can no longer afford the fees at all.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.
Which shows that the economic impact of this is currently very uneven and it is very likely to become even more so going forward.
Most private schools (outside the top 'public' schools) operate as charities and don't have a lot of profit margin, savings or endowments.1 -
Be interesting to see where the care homes areAndy_Cooke said:I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories:
- Stockholm
- Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million.
(1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.0 -
Well there sort of is....13 years ago, no widespread GPU processing via CUDA support for number crunching, no ability to throw this stuff up into the cloud, no Docker, no TPUs...RobD said:
Agreed, but there's nothing intrinsically wrong with old code. Old methods certainly!FrancisUrquhart said:
Since 13 years ago, when Mr Imperial's model was coded, we have gone through a revolution in ML taking things from being able to solve toy problems to complex real world things. And not just the well publicised deep learning neural network stuff, but things like Gaussian Processes.RobD said:
Nothing wrong with old code. Old techniques, definitely.
And due to their widespread use, highly optimized libraries are available for most of them, if nothing else to build out from.
Even if his method is sound, I bet it runs orders of magnitude slower than it should, because it won't have been developed with all the available advances.
Not creating code to make use of number crunching on a GPU these days is just dereliction of duty.0 -
I don't think there's ever been big money in epidemiology, and those sorts of skills can earn a lot more elsewhere, probably. So perhaps doesn't attract the brightest ?FrancisUrquhart said:MaxPB said:
That's good news, it's become clear that the government's advisory body isn't fit for purpose and there are a lot of resources in the private sector for predictive modelling that can be used. I also think that their prerequisite of asking for people with pandemic modelling is incorrect. People who go in with assumptions are going to come up with incorrect conclusions, one of those assumptions will be wrong and the decision making process will be compromised. I've found the best investment managers have no economic background and the best data modellers don't need specific experience working in one sector or another and can work with any data.
The more I read about the modelling, I was shocked just how out of date most of the techniques (and code) they are were utilizing was. They seem totally unaware of lots of modern ML techniques, such as Gaussian Processes (and no that isn't just fitting a Gaussian to some data).
Seems like a real lack of multi-disciplinary cross pollination of ideas has gone on.
The UW model is an absolute shit show on so many levels...and that is one apparently the US government thinks is good.
(I may be being unfair, but it's a theory.)0 -
But right now a lot of their staff are furloughed, they are not incurring heating bills, etc, not using anything like the same amount of stationary, materials etc. not running school trips all around the country, etc etc. In my son's school at least iPads have been in use as a teaching tool for several years now and the additional IT cost will be minimal.Sandpit said:
Private schools are going to have a total nightmare. They are still incurring the vast majority of their costs during lockdown, lessons-from-home technology is an additional cost, and when lessons resume their variable costs are pretty much all staff salaries.TOPPING said:
Most English schools are voluntarily reducing fees. Prep schools around 15-20%, public schools more (Eton 30% for example).DavidL said:
My son's school did an interesting questionnaire recently about fees for this term where there is some teaching online. From a range of options 40 odd per cent were content to pay the existing fees. I suspect that they were a combination of the rich and those who are not financially affected (there are a lot of doctors kids at the school). The next largest was those seeking a 20% discount which included me. Some went for smaller increases and about 70 are seeking bursaries on the basis that they can no longer afford the fees at all.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.
Which shows that the economic impact of this is currently very uneven and it is very likely to become even more so going forward.
Most private schools (outside the top 'public' schools) operate as charities and don't have a lot of profit margin, savings or endowments.0 -
I'd be surprised if these problems relied on a huge amount of CPU power. It's likely your laptop has a good enough processor for the job.FrancisUrquhart said:
Well there sort of is....13 years ago, no widespread GPU processing via CUDA support for number crunching, no ability to throw this stuff up into the cloud, no Docker, no TPUs...RobD said:
Agreed, but there's nothing intrinsically wrong with old code. Old methods certainly!FrancisUrquhart said:
Since 13 years ago, when Mr Imperial's model was coded, we have gone through a revolution in ML taking things from being able to solve toy problems to complex real world things. And not just the well publicised deep learning neural network stuff, but things like Gaussian Processes.RobD said:
Nothing wrong with old code. Old techniques, definitely.
And due to their widespread use, highly optimized libraries are available for most of them, if nothing else to build out from.
Even if his method is sound, I bet it runs orders of magnitude slower than it should, because it won't have been developed with all the available advances.1 -
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.0 -
Do the viruses have little clocks in them?NerysHughes said:
Well 120 days is around 4 monthseadric said:FPT anabobazina posted this interesting remark
2:55PM
Is there now some evidence that this thing peaks after 60 days and burns out after 120?
Hmm.
*****
Could that be right or is it too much to ask?
Ok I’m off for my legal daily
Surely it's more likely that the falling off is more down to government and people's raction to it?0 -
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.Nigelb said:
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.1 -
It's even more an organisational process.Sandpit said:
As has been said on here for a while, the process by which the lockdown occurred was pretty much entirely science-driven.Andy_JS said:Best article today IMO, by Philip Collins, (behind the Times paywall).
"Johnson’s tragedy is that he has no safe option
Every political decision means weighing costs and benefits but rarely are the choices as grim as those the PM faces no" (£)
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/johnsons-tragedy-is-that-he-has-no-safe-option-3qgq9kgfn
The process by which is is relaxed, however, is a much more political process, with ministers needing to weigh up the various scientific, economic and health factors (including health factors caused by the lockdown) to come to a conclusion.
If done competently, then the political element ought to be moot.0 -
@FrancisUrquhart - should i feel bad for doing my MCMCs on a CPU and not a GPU then?
0 -
Fixed for you...RobD said:@FrancisUrquhart - should i feel bad for doing my MCMCs ....then?
0 -
Apparently dispersed through the country, as social care for the elderly is devolved to county councils. Unless the elderly specifically move to Stockholm County when they get old, one wouldn't expect any concentration there much beyond the proportionate population concentration.isam said:
Be interesting to see where the care homes areAndy_Cooke said:I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories:
- Stockholm
- Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million.
(1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.0 -
I think there is a wider issue of lack of multi-disciplinary working. Not just epidemiology, but across a range of subjects.Nigelb said:
I don't think there's ever been big money in epidemiology, and those sorts of skills can earn a lot more elsewhere, probably. So perhaps doesn't attract the brightest ?FrancisUrquhart said:MaxPB said:
That's good news, it's become clear that the government's advisory body isn't fit for purpose and there are a lot of resources in the private sector for predictive modelling that can be used. I also think that their prerequisite of asking for people with pandemic modelling is incorrect. People who go in with assumptions are going to come up with incorrect conclusions, one of those assumptions will be wrong and the decision making process will be compromised. I've found the best investment managers have no economic background and the best data modellers don't need specific experience working in one sector or another and can work with any data.
The more I read about the modelling, I was shocked just how out of date most of the techniques (and code) they are were utilizing was. They seem totally unaware of lots of modern ML techniques, such as Gaussian Processes (and no that isn't just fitting a Gaussian to some data).
Seems like a real lack of multi-disciplinary cross pollination of ideas has gone on.
The UW model is an absolute shit show on so many levels...and that is one apparently the US government thinks is good.
(I may be being unfair, but it's a theory.)0 -
There's going to be talk of almost nothing else but this target, for the next seven days.RobD said:
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.Nigelb said:
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
In the eyes of the media and opposition, meeting (or missing) that target will define the whole government response to the pandemic.0 -
Correct - I`m very suspicious of this poll. It doesn`t tally with the people I`m in contact with. When those who are (superficially) in favour of lockdown continuance have it pointed out to them that this would be without their salaries being covered while they stay at home, they suddenly change to being anti-lockdown, and this reality is not captured in this poll.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.0 -
Is it sad that when I get a big dataset I start thinking about using tensorflow for my predictive analytics?FrancisUrquhart said:
Since 13 years ago, when Mr Imperial's model was coded, we have gone through a revolution in ML taking things from being able to solve toy problems to complex real world things. And not just the well publicised deep learning neural network stuff, but things like Gaussian Processes, Bayesian optimization, yadda yadda yadda.RobD said:
Nothing wrong with old code. Old techniques, definitely.
And due to their widespread use, highly optimized libraries are available for most of them, if nothing else to build out from.1 -
It's bollocks. And they won't care if it's being used effectively or not. That's why the government have this website, they just want huge numbers of people to get tested for no real reason.Sandpit said:
There's going to be talk of almost nothing else but this target, for the next seven days.RobD said:
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.Nigelb said:
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
In the eyes of the media and opposition, meeting (or missing) that target will define the whole government response to the pandemic.0 -
You mean rather than PyTorchMaxPB said:
Is it sad that when I get a big dataset I start thinking about using tensorflow for my predictive analytics?FrancisUrquhart said:
Since 13 years ago, when Mr Imperial's model was coded, we have gone through a revolution in ML taking things from being able to solve toy problems to complex real world things. And not just the well publicised deep learning neural network stuff, but things like Gaussian Processes, Bayesian optimization, yadda yadda yadda.RobD said:
Nothing wrong with old code. Old techniques, definitely.
And due to their widespread use, highly optimized libraries are available for most of them, if nothing else to build out from. 0 -
Ah okay. I had assumed the staff were all working on remote lessons rather than being furloughed. Housekeeping and gardening will still need to happen, maybe catering in day schools could have been saved, and the utility bills will be a little lower. When I were a lad, stationery and trips were additionally charged.DavidL said:
But right now a lot of their staff are furloughed, they are not incurring heating bills, etc, not using anything like the same amount of stationary, materials etc. not running school trips all around the country, etc etc. In my son's school at least iPads have been in use as a teaching tool for several years now and the additional IT cost will be minimal.Sandpit said:
Private schools are going to have a total nightmare. They are still incurring the vast majority of their costs during lockdown, lessons-from-home technology is an additional cost, and when lessons resume their variable costs are pretty much all staff salaries.TOPPING said:
Most English schools are voluntarily reducing fees. Prep schools around 15-20%, public schools more (Eton 30% for example).DavidL said:
My son's school did an interesting questionnaire recently about fees for this term where there is some teaching online. From a range of options 40 odd per cent were content to pay the existing fees. I suspect that they were a combination of the rich and those who are not financially affected (there are a lot of doctors kids at the school). The next largest was those seeking a 20% discount which included me. Some went for smaller increases and about 70 are seeking bursaries on the basis that they can no longer afford the fees at all.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.
Which shows that the economic impact of this is currently very uneven and it is very likely to become even more so going forward.
Most private schools (outside the top 'public' schools) operate as charities and don't have a lot of profit margin, savings or endowments.0 -
The government kicked off the whole process.RobD said:
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.Nigelb said:
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
Comes back to what I said earlier about explaining in a grown up manner what you're trying to do; what are the constraints, what the challenges, and what the possibilities. They really haven't bothered, which gives a degree of concern that they don't really have it worked out.0 -
Or is it possible that enough of us are exposed sufficiently to get our immune systems working on it even if the dose is not sufficient to actually give us it? The way SARS and H1N1 largely fizzled out was hard to explain.logical_song said:
Do the viruses have little clocks in them?NerysHughes said:
Well 120 days is around 4 monthseadric said:FPT anabobazina posted this interesting remark
2:55PM
Is there now some evidence that this thing peaks after 60 days and burns out after 120?
Hmm.
*****
Could that be right or is it too much to ask?
Ok I’m off for my legal daily
Surely it's more likely that the falling off is more down to government and people's raction to it?0 -
LOL. Touché, sir.FrancisUrquhart said:0 -
In response to constant demands of why we aren't doing X numbers of tests per day like other countries.Nigelb said:
The government kicked off the whole process.RobD said:
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.Nigelb said:
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
Comes back to what I said earlier about explaining in a grown up manner what you're trying to do; what are the constraints, what the challenges, and what the possibilities. They really haven't bothered, which gives a degree of concern that they don't really have it worked out.2 -
The 100k a day was a silly line in the sand. Why not have said 50k and then smashed through it, the old under promise and over deliver.
I am fairly certain it was just driven by the reports at the time that Germany can do 100k a day (although nobody fully knows these figures, as they aren't centrally reported). And of course, they can now probably do 200k a day now, so the criticism will still be, look they can do more.
Would have been better to lay out a number that allowed certain things to happen i.e everybody in hospital getting them, NHS getting them, etc.
Also...big thing...it isn't about the amount of tests, it is speed of processing. You have to get these conducted and results reported within 24hrs with this CV bastard, 2-3 days is too long.1 -
It's not at all unfair, it's correct. Anyone with a decent level of predictive analytics skill will be earning big money in banking or tech. It's why I made the point earlier about the government engagement with industry being limited to people with pandemic modelling as being a mistake. I just think people in that sector are way, way behind the times as we have seen with some of the poor decision making from the government and their advisers vs even amateur level data modellers let alone the top people.Nigelb said:
I don't think there's ever been big money in epidemiology, and those sorts of skills can earn a lot more elsewhere, probably. So perhaps doesn't attract the brightest ?FrancisUrquhart said:MaxPB said:
That's good news, it's become clear that the government's advisory body isn't fit for purpose and there are a lot of resources in the private sector for predictive modelling that can be used. I also think that their prerequisite of asking for people with pandemic modelling is incorrect. People who go in with assumptions are going to come up with incorrect conclusions, one of those assumptions will be wrong and the decision making process will be compromised. I've found the best investment managers have no economic background and the best data modellers don't need specific experience working in one sector or another and can work with any data.
The more I read about the modelling, I was shocked just how out of date most of the techniques (and code) they are were utilizing was. They seem totally unaware of lots of modern ML techniques, such as Gaussian Processes (and no that isn't just fitting a Gaussian to some data).
Seems like a real lack of multi-disciplinary cross pollination of ideas has gone on.
The UW model is an absolute shit show on so many levels...and that is one apparently the US government thinks is good.
(I may be being unfair, but it's a theory.)0 -
There was an interesting feature on the morning news about the virologists at Bristol suddenly finding themselves collaborating fruitfully with other university colleagues they'd never even been aware of previously...FrancisUrquhart said:
I think there is a wider issue of lack of multi-disciplinary working. Not just epidemiology, but across a range of subjects.Nigelb said:
I don't think there's ever been big money in epidemiology, and those sorts of skills can earn a lot more elsewhere, probably. So perhaps doesn't attract the brightest ?FrancisUrquhart said:MaxPB said:
That's good news, it's become clear that the government's advisory body isn't fit for purpose and there are a lot of resources in the private sector for predictive modelling that can be used. I also think that their prerequisite of asking for people with pandemic modelling is incorrect. People who go in with assumptions are going to come up with incorrect conclusions, one of those assumptions will be wrong and the decision making process will be compromised. I've found the best investment managers have no economic background and the best data modellers don't need specific experience working in one sector or another and can work with any data.
The more I read about the modelling, I was shocked just how out of date most of the techniques (and code) they are were utilizing was. They seem totally unaware of lots of modern ML techniques, such as Gaussian Processes (and no that isn't just fitting a Gaussian to some data).
Seems like a real lack of multi-disciplinary cross pollination of ideas has gone on.
The UW model is an absolute shit show on so many levels...and that is one apparently the US government thinks is good.
(I may be being unfair, but it's a theory.)1 -
Yes it's complete bollocks, but every government effort now is going towards the number of tests done next Thursday and Friday. They can be more organised by Saturday but the only thing that counts (in the eyes of many) is the 100k number by the 30th April.RobD said:
It's bollocks. And they won't care if it's being used effectively or not. That's why the government have this website, they just want huge numbers of people to get tested for no real reason.Sandpit said:
There's going to be talk of almost nothing else but this target, for the next seven days.RobD said:
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.Nigelb said:
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
In the eyes of the media and opposition, meeting (or missing) that target will define the whole government response to the pandemic.
The way I'd do it, is to have the military take over 1,000 car parks, doing 100 tests each over the course of each day. Probably only needs a couple of people trained at each site, plus the logistics of getting the tests to labs. Perhaps National Blood Service could also help, they're pretty good at medical logistics too, and have vehicles with blue lights.0 -
🤮 Facebook.FrancisUrquhart said:
You mean rather than PyTorchMaxPB said:
Is it sad that when I get a big dataset I start thinking about using tensorflow for my predictive analytics?FrancisUrquhart said:
Since 13 years ago, when Mr Imperial's model was coded, we have gone through a revolution in ML taking things from being able to solve toy problems to complex real world things. And not just the well publicised deep learning neural network stuff, but things like Gaussian Processes, Bayesian optimization, yadda yadda yadda.RobD said:
Nothing wrong with old code. Old techniques, definitely.
And due to their widespread use, highly optimized libraries are available for most of them, if nothing else to build out from.0 -
It shouldn't be too difficult as long as the capacity is there. The number administered has already gone up 10k in a number of days. Don't get me wrong, it will be great to have the capacity there, but I strongly suspect it is not being used effectively.Sandpit said:
Yes it's complete bollocks, but every government effort now is going towards the number of tests done next Thursday and Friday. They can be more organised by Saturday but the only thing that counts (in the eyes of many) is the 100k number by the 30th April.RobD said:
It's bollocks. And they won't care if it's being used effectively or not. That's why the government have this website, they just want huge numbers of people to get tested for no real reason.Sandpit said:
There's going to be talk of almost nothing else but this target, for the next seven days.RobD said:
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.Nigelb said:
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
In the eyes of the media and opposition, meeting (or missing) that target will define the whole government response to the pandemic.
The way I'd do it, is to have the military take over 1,000 car parks, doing 100 tests each over the course of each day. Probably only needs a couple of people trained at each site, plus the logistics of getting the tests to labs. Perhaps National Blood Service could also help, they're pretty good at medical logistics too, and have vehicles with blue lights.0 -
As somebody with a PhD in Computer Science, I was always surprised how little my research group interacted with the Maths department. I remember asking my supervisor about something particularly mathsy I had read in a paper that I didn't understand and he also couldn't get his head around it.Nigelb said:
There was an interesting feature on the morning news about the virologists at Bristol suddenly finding themselves collaborating fruitfully with other university colleagues they'd never even been aware of previously...FrancisUrquhart said:
I think there is a wider issue of lack of multi-disciplinary working. Not just epidemiology, but across a range of subjects.Nigelb said:
I don't think there's ever been big money in epidemiology, and those sorts of skills can earn a lot more elsewhere, probably. So perhaps doesn't attract the brightest ?FrancisUrquhart said:MaxPB said:
That's good news, it's become clear that the government's advisory body isn't fit for purpose and there are a lot of resources in the private sector for predictive modelling that can be used. I also think that their prerequisite of asking for people with pandemic modelling is incorrect. People who go in with assumptions are going to come up with incorrect conclusions, one of those assumptions will be wrong and the decision making process will be compromised. I've found the best investment managers have no economic background and the best data modellers don't need specific experience working in one sector or another and can work with any data.
The more I read about the modelling, I was shocked just how out of date most of the techniques (and code) they are were utilizing was. They seem totally unaware of lots of modern ML techniques, such as Gaussian Processes (and no that isn't just fitting a Gaussian to some data).
Seems like a real lack of multi-disciplinary cross pollination of ideas has gone on.
The UW model is an absolute shit show on so many levels...and that is one apparently the US government thinks is good.
(I may be being unfair, but it's a theory.)
When I suggested, I popped over to the Maths department and see if I could find somebody who might be able to explain it, I got looked at as if I had just suggested we hire a leper to make the teas.2 -
Thinking back to that plane load of gowns from Turkey. Given that they were only supposed to last a day or less than a day, I assume there are no more left?0
-
South Korea has also had the virus far more under control than we've ever managed.RobD said:
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.Nigelb said:
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.0 -
The UK is painfully slowly moving in the right direction with testing and surveillance. I wonder how much of a distraction this testing target has been though.Pulpstar said:
South Korea has also had the virus far more under control than we've ever managed.RobD said:
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.Nigelb said:
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.0 -
I live in an area of relatively low population in SE Spain where the DR/million is 87 compared to Madrid at 1,165!Andy_Cooke said:I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories:
- Stockholm
- Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million.
(1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.0 -
I wouldn'ty be suprised if "Stockholm" is also bimodally distributed. The Stockholm county area covers more than just the city.MaxPB said:
That to me looks like massive under reporting outside of Stockholm. The whole nation seems like it's in denial about their course of action.Andy_Cooke said:I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories:
- Stockholm
- Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million.
(1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.
I bet if you coud spliy by smaller sub region then it would just be central Stockholm that was red hot.0 -
Indeed capital cities tend to have considerably younger populations than national average.Andy_Cooke said:
Apparently dispersed through the country, as social care for the elderly is devolved to county councils. Unless the elderly specifically move to Stockholm County when they get old, one wouldn't expect any concentration there much beyond the proportionate population concentration.isam said:
Be interesting to see where the care homes areAndy_Cooke said:I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories:
- Stockholm
- Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million.
(1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.0 -
That't my opinion too, but unfortunately I am working on something where it looks like I am going to have to use it.MaxPB said:
🤮 Facebook.FrancisUrquhart said:
You mean rather than PyTorchMaxPB said:
Is it sad that when I get a big dataset I start thinking about using tensorflow for my predictive analytics?FrancisUrquhart said:
Since 13 years ago, when Mr Imperial's model was coded, we have gone through a revolution in ML taking things from being able to solve toy problems to complex real world things. And not just the well publicised deep learning neural network stuff, but things like Gaussian Processes, Bayesian optimization, yadda yadda yadda.RobD said:
Nothing wrong with old code. Old techniques, definitely.
And due to their widespread use, highly optimized libraries are available for most of them, if nothing else to build out from.0 -
That was because they acted so quickly at the beginning that their total number of cases is currently standing at only 10,708. Even with our inadequate level of testing we're finding more than half that in new cases every day.Nigelb said:
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.
We spent all this time at the beginning telling ourselves we were lucky to have two weeks more warning than Italy to react to the situation (and more time than that compared to South Korea), but we didn't manage to use that time to reduce the peak rate of infection.0 -
If you applied that to the UK, and exluded London, then that would be interesting.Andy_Cooke said:I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories:
- Stockholm
- Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million.
(1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.0 -
Each department has some teaching staff doing the remote lessons but not the full amount. Certainly in the company I am involved in we are rotating staff on a 3 week basis, being the minimum amount of time that you are allowed to be furloughed. I suspect the school will do likewise for many of their staff. Not sure about housekeeping but certainly no lunches etc.Sandpit said:
Ah okay. I had assumed the staff were all working on remote lessons rather than being furloughed. Housekeeping and gardening will still need to happen, maybe catering in day schools could have been saved, and the utility bills will be a little lower. When I were a lad, stationery and trips were additionally charged.DavidL said:
But right now a lot of their staff are furloughed, they are not incurring heating bills, etc, not using anything like the same amount of stationary, materials etc. not running school trips all around the country, etc etc. In my son's school at least iPads have been in use as a teaching tool for several years now and the additional IT cost will be minimal.Sandpit said:
Private schools are going to have a total nightmare. They are still incurring the vast majority of their costs during lockdown, lessons-from-home technology is an additional cost, and when lessons resume their variable costs are pretty much all staff salaries.TOPPING said:
Most English schools are voluntarily reducing fees. Prep schools around 15-20%, public schools more (Eton 30% for example).DavidL said:
My son's school did an interesting questionnaire recently about fees for this term where there is some teaching online. From a range of options 40 odd per cent were content to pay the existing fees. I suspect that they were a combination of the rich and those who are not financially affected (there are a lot of doctors kids at the school). The next largest was those seeking a 20% discount which included me. Some went for smaller increases and about 70 are seeking bursaries on the basis that they can no longer afford the fees at all.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.
Which shows that the economic impact of this is currently very uneven and it is very likely to become even more so going forward.
Most private schools (outside the top 'public' schools) operate as charities and don't have a lot of profit margin, savings or endowments.0 -
What was South Korea's peak +ve % of it's tests. We need to ramp up testing numbers to get that dropped.RobD said:
The UK is painfully slowly moving in the right direction with testing and surveillance. I wonder how much of a distraction this testing target has been though.Pulpstar said:
South Korea has also had the virus far more under control than we've ever managed.RobD said:
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.Nigelb said:
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.0 -
Why would the top public schools not be charities? Eton and Winchester, frexample, are, and I'm guessing everyone else is.Sandpit said:
Private schools are going to have a total nightmare. They are still incurring the vast majority of their costs during lockdown, lessons-from-home technology is an additional cost, and when lessons resume their variable costs are pretty much all staff salaries.TOPPING said:
Most English schools are voluntarily reducing fees. Prep schools around 15-20%, public schools more (Eton 30% for example).DavidL said:
My son's school did an interesting questionnaire recently about fees for this term where there is some teaching online. From a range of options 40 odd per cent were content to pay the existing fees. I suspect that they were a combination of the rich and those who are not financially affected (there are a lot of doctors kids at the school). The next largest was those seeking a 20% discount which included me. Some went for smaller increases and about 70 are seeking bursaries on the basis that they can no longer afford the fees at all.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.
Which shows that the economic impact of this is currently very uneven and it is very likely to become even more so going forward.
Most private schools (outside the top 'public' schools) operate as charities and don't have a lot of profit margin, savings or endowments.0 -
I would have expected those two departments (in general, not just at one university) to be working closely together all the time. Very surprising.FrancisUrquhart said:
As somebody with a PhD in Computer Science, I was always surprised how little my research group interacted with the Maths department. I remember asking my supervisor about something particularly mathsy I had read in a paper that I didn't understand and he also couldn't get his head around it.Nigelb said:
There was an interesting feature on the morning news about the virologists at Bristol suddenly finding themselves collaborating fruitfully with other university colleagues they'd never even been aware of previously...FrancisUrquhart said:
I think there is a wider issue of lack of multi-disciplinary working. Not just epidemiology, but across a range of subjects.Nigelb said:
I don't think there's ever been big money in epidemiology, and those sorts of skills can earn a lot more elsewhere, probably. So perhaps doesn't attract the brightest ?FrancisUrquhart said:MaxPB said:
That's good news, it's become clear that the government's advisory body isn't fit for purpose and there are a lot of resources in the private sector for predictive modelling that can be used. I also think that their prerequisite of asking for people with pandemic modelling is incorrect. People who go in with assumptions are going to come up with incorrect conclusions, one of those assumptions will be wrong and the decision making process will be compromised. I've found the best investment managers have no economic background and the best data modellers don't need specific experience working in one sector or another and can work with any data.
The more I read about the modelling, I was shocked just how out of date most of the techniques (and code) they are were utilizing was. They seem totally unaware of lots of modern ML techniques, such as Gaussian Processes (and no that isn't just fitting a Gaussian to some data).
Seems like a real lack of multi-disciplinary cross pollination of ideas has gone on.
The UW model is an absolute shit show on so many levels...and that is one apparently the US government thinks is good.
(I may be being unfair, but it's a theory.)
When I suggested, I popped over to the Maths department and see if I could find somebody who might be able to explain it, I got looked at as if I had just suggested we hire a leper to make the teas.0 -
I wondered why Trevor Philips was trending on twitter...then I saw this. It instantly been claimed it is a whitewash because he is racist Islamaphobe.
As a first step, PHE will be linking thousands of existing health records for confirmed COVID-19 cases to gather more robust data, and I am delighted that Trevor Phillips OBE and Professor Richard Webber have agreed to provide expert independent support.
https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov.uk/2020/04/24/duncan-selbies-friday-message-24-april-2020/
2 -
My son's school has cut fees by 20%.DavidL said:
Each department has some teaching staff doing the remote lessons but not the full amount. Certainly in the company I am involved in we are rotating staff on a 3 week basis, being the minimum amount of time that you are allowed to be furloughed. I suspect the school will do likewise for many of their staff. Not sure about housekeeping but certainly no lunches etc.Sandpit said:
Ah okay. I had assumed the staff were all working on remote lessons rather than being furloughed. Housekeeping and gardening will still need to happen, maybe catering in day schools could have been saved, and the utility bills will be a little lower. When I were a lad, stationery and trips were additionally charged.DavidL said:
But right now a lot of their staff are furloughed, they are not incurring heating bills, etc, not using anything like the same amount of stationary, materials etc. not running school trips all around the country, etc etc. In my son's school at least iPads have been in use as a teaching tool for several years now and the additional IT cost will be minimal.Sandpit said:
Private schools are going to have a total nightmare. They are still incurring the vast majority of their costs during lockdown, lessons-from-home technology is an additional cost, and when lessons resume their variable costs are pretty much all staff salaries.TOPPING said:
Most English schools are voluntarily reducing fees. Prep schools around 15-20%, public schools more (Eton 30% for example).DavidL said:
My son's school did an interesting questionnaire recently about fees for this term where there is some teaching online. From a range of options 40 odd per cent were content to pay the existing fees. I suspect that they were a combination of the rich and those who are not financially affected (there are a lot of doctors kids at the school). The next largest was those seeking a 20% discount which included me. Some went for smaller increases and about 70 are seeking bursaries on the basis that they can no longer afford the fees at all.eadric said:On topic, surely this is because the economic impact of coronavirus has not really been felt?
The weather is lovely. We haven’t run out of food. The government is paying everyone’s wages. Life is actually quite pleasant, certainly tolerable, at the moment, for many.
Wait til people move from furlough to the dole.
Which shows that the economic impact of this is currently very uneven and it is very likely to become even more so going forward.
Most private schools (outside the top 'public' schools) operate as charities and don't have a lot of profit margin, savings or endowments.0 -
Okay. As per the PHE published deaths as of today:Slackbladder said:
If you applied that to the UK, and exluded London, then that would be interesting.Andy_Cooke said:I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories:
- Stockholm
- Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million.
(1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.
- London: 491 deaths/million
- Rest of UK: 261 deaths per million
There's still a difference, but it's less stark (London has a death rate 88% higher than Rest Of UK; Stockholm County has a death rate 311% higher than the rest of Sweden).
Oh. Stockholm County has a worse death rate per capita than the worst region in the UK.0 -
Does Sweden have a Birmingham ?Slackbladder said:
If you applied that to the UK, and exluded London, then that would be interesting.Andy_Cooke said:I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories:
- Stockholm
- Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million.
(1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.0 -
Looking at mortality per 100 000 population, all of London is at the top end, but very top is the Black Country and Birmingham. In England at least it seems more evenly spread. Leics continues at about half the national rate, a quarter of the West Midlands.Slackbladder said:
If you applied that to the UK, and exluded London, then that would be interesting.Andy_Cooke said:I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories:
- Stockholm
- Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million.
(1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.
0 -
PB.com commenter @Tissue_Price on the science select commitee on skynews.1
-
Yeah, but they were probably using their testing capacity effectively. I don't think we are.Pulpstar said:
What was South Korea's peak +ve % of it's tests. We need to ramp up testing numbers to get that dropped.RobD said:
The UK is painfully slowly moving in the right direction with testing and surveillance. I wonder how much of a distraction this testing target has been though.Pulpstar said:
South Korea has also had the virus far more under control than we've ever managed.RobD said:
Yep, but the media narrative is such that it has to be 100k per day no matter the cost, no matter the science.Nigelb said:
It was a pretty arbitrary target anyway.FrancisUrquhart said:Government will be doing well to exceed 50,000 tests by end of next week, let alone 100k
https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1253688601637986304?s=20
S. Korea managed to control their outbreak with around 20k a day, which suggests it's not all about the raw numbers.0 -
Malmo or Lund.Pulpstar said:
Does Sweden have a Birmingham ?Slackbladder said:
If you applied that to the UK, and exluded London, then that would be interesting.Andy_Cooke said:I saw someone point out that Sweden, with coronavirus, is in fact two stories:
- Stockholm
- Rest of Sweden
... which marches well with the suggestion that the local population density really has to be taken into account.
As of today, Stockholm passed the figure of 500 deaths per million.
(1,192 deaths in a population of 2.377 million).
The rest of Sweden has a figure of 122 deaths per million (960 deaths out of 7.85 million)
Quite a difference.0 -
I think a lot of the discussion around recent advances in computer modelling may be a little misguided. The key advance in the last decade or so (well, in my field, anyway) has been around processing speed and efficiency, which allows us to work on bigger datasets and do more things with them.
For example, running a GLM on a motor insurance book with 10 years of 500k policies (ie 5m vehicle years) used to occupy the pricing team for weeks, and meant they could update the results maybe a few times a year. Now, they can virtually rerun it in real time every time a new claim comes in, which frees them up to do more interesting stuff.
Similarly, around a decade ago, we still had to roll-up the natural catastrophe exposed portfolio (say a few million properties) every month - because it had to run over the weekend. A few years back, we switched to real time analysis that could be refreshed during renewal season for each individual contract.
My point is that I don't see what the analogue is in terms of datasets, regarding pandemic modelling. If it was worth assessing the susceptibility of the entire UK population, on a line-by-line basis, then sure, new methods (and hardware) would be absolutely key. But that doesn't seem to follow logically. It feels more like the issues are good old-fashioned ones like whether the models are robust enough, and how well they've been sensitivity tested, or the extent to which they rely on incomplete or potentially inaccurate data. And, while there have certainly been developments in those areas in recent years, I'm not sure there's been quite the quantum shift that would render the older ones totally redundant (even assuming the government advisers are materially behind the curve).2 -
Some 5,000 home kits and 19,000 drive-through tests are expected to be made available online from 8am tomorrow....
Ministers say that UK testing capacity is now at 51,000 a day.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8252717/Coronavirus-UK-Key-workers-start-booking-Covid-19-tests-new-system.html
Even the spin number is only half what it needs to be.0
