It's quite incredible. This chemical appears to have a safety profile comparable with the coronavirus itself, and yet the stock market appears to anticipate a possibility that people will get injected with it en masse.
Discussing facts with leftists in their own bastion (the HN) is a waste of time. The other poster refuted the central thesis of the article and all they got for it were downvotes.
I think the disconnect between people who get their knowledge of the world from hyperpartisan far-left publications such as NYT and the reality is more important than whether Trump is self-made rich or "inherited-rich" (both being far preferable to "rich-through-civil-service"). That is what I was hinting at.
> Either in-person classes are safe, and the rules can go back to pre-pandemic, or they aren't, and forcing students and professors to attend them is dangerous and cruel.
Actually, in-person classes are completely safe and this is a gentle nudge from the federal administration to make the universities reconsider their (completely political) decision to not resume normal classes this Fall.
A fact check would be fine if it led to objective analyses of some sort, or even Wikipedia. But when I clicked it, it displayed some highly partisan sources, including a CNN article with its usual "Trump bad" vitriol. Maybe it was an algorithm's fault, but it didn't work at all.
It's just too contagious and countries are opening up that still have quite a large number of infections. Seems like a very tricky balancing act to keep R under 1.
Interesting predictions. However, they do not fit the facts on the ground, at least here in Poland, which is some weeks ahead of the US with respect to the development of the epidemic.
(I'm relieved that) people have gotten sick and tired of the restrictions, about 50% (and growing every day) are not wearing the masks inside anymore, or bother with the distancing, despite official requirements. All restaurants and bars are opening up on Monday, my favourite one described the prior atmosphere as a "psychosis of fear".
It's interesting what happens when the second wave of infections occurs, which is becoming more and more likely. It's hard to imagine the population will be as fearful and obedient as the first time, should the government try to impose another lockdown.
If, as Nassim Taleb believes, the lockdown was bottom-up, demanded by the people rather than imposed by the government, a repeat seems unlikely. Perhaps that's why the stock market is surging?
Yeah, it only takes into account whether one has preconditions or not, at the moment. The plan was to produce more detailed calculations, but it is difficult.
I don't log or store anything, except for what is logged by Google Analytics.
> If they were to end up dying of COVID-19 because they are induced to take more risks, do you think you will have exposed yourself to any legal liability?
If that were the case, publishing any actuarial tables should lead to legal liability (and it definitely doesn't, at least where I am from).