LOL OKJay wrote:
I don't like bad math extrapolated from small sample sizes made into policy.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
No, what I'm saying is that without protective measures, and with a normal flu infection rate of roughly 36 million people (about 10% of the US population gets the flu every year), we'd end up with roughly 176,000 deaths from this virus. It's bad, but it's not remotely close to what the UK college was putting out a few days ago which scared everyone into complete lockdown.uziq wrote:
so you agree the measures are totally necessary otherwise a helluva lot of people would die. glad you came around. took you 25 pages.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
10% of the US population gets the flu every year because it is half as contagious as coronavirus and we have extensive vaccination and immunology for flu, jay.
are you seriously this fucking stupid? we have N O immunity to coronavirus, it is a NOVEL disease. 'without protective measures', 90% of the population get it.
that 'UK college' is probably the best medical/science university in the western world. top5 at the least. but i forgot you don't like credentials or expertise.
are you seriously this fucking stupid? we have N O immunity to coronavirus, it is a NOVEL disease. 'without protective measures', 90% of the population get it.
that 'UK college' is probably the best medical/science university in the western world. top5 at the least. but i forgot you don't like credentials or expertise.
Last edited by uziq (2020-03-20 16:44:41)
Ok, so let's say it's as widespread as swine flu was back in 2009 here in the States (I caught that one, and it sucked bad). 60.8 million cases, nearly twice as many as the standard 36 million flu cases. 60,800,000 * 0.08 = 486,400 deaths. About 20 times a standard flu season. I agree, it's bad, but it's not the end of civilization. We'll get through this.uziq wrote:
10% of the US population gets the flu every year because it is half as contagious as coronavirus and we have extensive vaccination and immunology for flu, jay.
are you seriously this fucking stupid? we have N O immunity to coronavirus, it is a NOVEL disease. 'without protective measures', 90% of the population get it.
that 'UK college' is probably the best medical/science university in the western world. top5 at the least. but i forgot you don't like credentials or expertise.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
coronavirus is worse than swine flu.
and your changed math just gave a 20x result over a 'small oversight'. do you make those, er, rounding errors in your engineering?
i'm sorry, jay, but you are a genuinely stupid person. you do not understand epidemiology or basic human biology, by the sounds of it. no wonder you think the president that asked his top advisor 'can we just use a flu vaccine?' or 'how about we adapt a malaria medicine?' is doing a 'great job'.
you do not even understand the concept of people having no immune protection to a novel disease.
you complain about bad or small data sets for coronavirus modelling (i guess you don't know anything about the machine learning algorithms used in these things, even fundamental concepts like random forests), then extrapolate from flu and swine flu figures. if i were you, i'd be putting a lot more faith in experts, because you are beyond clueless. you're so clueless on this matter that you can't even recognise how lost you are.
and your changed math just gave a 20x result over a 'small oversight'. do you make those, er, rounding errors in your engineering?
i'm sorry, jay, but you are a genuinely stupid person. you do not understand epidemiology or basic human biology, by the sounds of it. no wonder you think the president that asked his top advisor 'can we just use a flu vaccine?' or 'how about we adapt a malaria medicine?' is doing a 'great job'.
you do not even understand the concept of people having no immune protection to a novel disease.
you complain about bad or small data sets for coronavirus modelling (i guess you don't know anything about the machine learning algorithms used in these things, even fundamental concepts like random forests), then extrapolate from flu and swine flu figures. if i were you, i'd be putting a lot more faith in experts, because you are beyond clueless. you're so clueless on this matter that you can't even recognise how lost you are.
Last edited by uziq (2020-03-20 16:57:21)
i actually fucking love that you're just spitballing figures over here using two variables and hawking figures from flu and swine flu, very different diseases with very different rates of contagion and mortality.
then you're dismissing epidemiologists, denigrating the highly complex modelling of the best research teams in the world on viral spreads.
"but wait, if only 10% of americans got flu last year, what's the fuss about with this corona-whatever? damn scare-mongering UK colleges!"
you've just got to admire the sheer pigheadedness of it. you ARE dunning–kruger and i want my $5.
then you're dismissing epidemiologists, denigrating the highly complex modelling of the best research teams in the world on viral spreads.
"but wait, if only 10% of americans got flu last year, what's the fuss about with this corona-whatever? damn scare-mongering UK colleges!"
you've just got to admire the sheer pigheadedness of it. you ARE dunning–kruger and i want my $5.
Last edited by uziq (2020-03-20 17:05:03)
No, uzi, I changed my math because you rightly pointed out that this virus has a higher transmission rate than normal flu, and is more akin to swine flu numbers, so I used that historical number instead.uziq wrote:
coronavirus is worse than swine flu.
and your changed math just gave a 20x result over a 'small oversight'. do you make those, er, rounding errors in your engineering?
i'm sorry, jay, but you are a genuinely stupid person. you do not understand epidemiology or basic human biology, by the sounds of it. no wonder you think the president that asked his top advisor 'can we just use a flu vaccine?' or 'how about we adapt a malaria medicine?' is doing a 'great job'.
you do not even understand the concept of people having no immune protection to a novel disease.
you complain about bad or small data sets for coronavirus modelling (i guess you don't know anything about the machine learning algorithms used in these things, even fundamental concepts like random forests), then extrapolate from flu and swine flu figures. if i were you, i'd be putting a lot more faith in experts, because you are beyond clueless. you're so clueless on this matter that you can't even recognise how lost you are.
Hey man, you're in a dark place, hopefully you get through. Things aren't so bad. There is light at the end of the tunnel. The more we learn, the less we have to fear. Now we just need them to crank out the test kits so we can actually identify the people with the virus so we can properly quarantine them instead of doing these mass house arrests.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
jay flips to condescension when he's not even close to having a grasp on the topic. it's so cute.
it does have a far higher transmission rate, you're right, you're getting closer jay! but that's not the reason it's far more dangerous.
jay, swine flu and regular flu are variants of a disease that has been known to us, immunised against, vaccinated for, since 1938.
do you understand? coronavirus is a novel disease. our immune systems are helpless. we have no vaccines. we don't even have an established anti-viral to help the body fight it off. that means, in any given population, hypothetically as close to 100% as is practically possible will get the disease if exposed to it.
transmission rates -- yes, good. remember those! they're useful when doing your cute a x b = c sums. but i think you need to take a high-school biology class, too. the reason so few people fall ill with flu and swine flu is because your average healthy person has an immune system that beats it off and avoids illness. coronavirus can freely infect everyone. even children who don't get sick outwardly with it are effectively little corona factories. it is a NOVEL disease.
please do some reading. please. you are really stupid and i fear you are going to cause some palpable harm.
it does have a far higher transmission rate, you're right, you're getting closer jay! but that's not the reason it's far more dangerous.
jay, swine flu and regular flu are variants of a disease that has been known to us, immunised against, vaccinated for, since 1938.
do you understand? coronavirus is a novel disease. our immune systems are helpless. we have no vaccines. we don't even have an established anti-viral to help the body fight it off. that means, in any given population, hypothetically as close to 100% as is practically possible will get the disease if exposed to it.
transmission rates -- yes, good. remember those! they're useful when doing your cute a x b = c sums. but i think you need to take a high-school biology class, too. the reason so few people fall ill with flu and swine flu is because your average healthy person has an immune system that beats it off and avoids illness. coronavirus can freely infect everyone. even children who don't get sick outwardly with it are effectively little corona factories. it is a NOVEL disease.
please do some reading. please. you are really stupid and i fear you are going to cause some palpable harm.
Last edited by uziq (2020-03-20 17:15:32)
Three times the US deaths in the Vietnam war.
No biggy.
No biggy.
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
uzi, you know, I spent all last weekend pissed off from arguing with you about this shit. I've avoided interacting with you this week. I'm not sure why I've broken down tonight, but here we are.uziq wrote:
jay flips to condescension when he's not even close to having a grasp on the situation. it's so cute.
it does have a far higher transmission rate, you're right, you're getting closer jay! but that's not the reason it's far more dangerous.
jay, swine flu and regular flu are variants of a disease that has been known to us, immunised against, vaccinated for, for decades.
do you understand? coronavirus is a novel disease. our immune systems are helpless. we have no vaccines. we don't even have an established anti-viral to help the body fight it off.
transmission rates -- yes, good. remember those! they're useful when doing your cute a x b = c sums. but i think you need to take a high-school biology class, too. the reason so few people fall ill with flu and swine flu is because your average healthy person has an immune system that beats it off and avoids illness. coronavirus can freely infect everyone. even children who don't get sick outwardly with it are effectively little corona factories. it is a NOVEL disease.
please do some reading. please. you are really stupid and i fear you are going to cause some palpable harm.
You're not nearly as bright as you think you are. In fact, you've never been anything but a follower. Right now, the people you follow are doom and gloom and predicting the end of the world, so you are as well.
I'm offering you conflicting ideas and instead of saying hmm, maybe I shouldn't expect the absolute worst outcome, and things will be ok, you get angry and condescending, and lash out, and question my intelligence.
And I will tell you how models are created... they are almost universally ultra-conservative. It doesn't matter if you're modeling a project budget, a schedule, global warming, or a virus' reproduction and transmission rate. It never pays to be anything but ultra conservative. If you're wrong, it's always better to be on the side of "hey look, reality is better than what we predicted, yay". So take anything that is released with a heavy grain of salt. Whatever numbers they are releasing from their model don't involve regression for seasonal weakening of the virus, it doesn't factor all this shelter in place stuff, it doesn't factor in people being extra cautious and washing their hands more because they have better information. What the model is going to do is show x person infecting y and z person and y and z person infecting a, b, c and d, with d dying. That's exponential growth, and it's the absolute worst case scenario. It's also not realistic.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
yes jay, i'm a follower. i followed my high-school biology textbook in understanding how the human immune system works.
please go and read a basic summary.
i do question your intelligence because it's taken you 27 pages of a pandemic thread to even grasp that coronavirus is NOT flu. the numbers of people who get infected with swine flu and the numbers who die from it have no bearing what-the-fuck-ever on a totally different, novel disease.
and a new virus in a previously unexposed population DOES spread more or less exponentially. this is a well known phenomenon. if you weren't so achingly illiterate on the biology then you would KNOW why this is so.
https://mathbench.umd.edu/modules/popn- … page15.htm
here is a fucking maths university site that lays it out very clearly. the first sentence:
maybe stop being such a condescending goon, jay, and educate yourself out of your ignorance.
please go and read a basic summary.
i do question your intelligence because it's taken you 27 pages of a pandemic thread to even grasp that coronavirus is NOT flu. the numbers of people who get infected with swine flu and the numbers who die from it have no bearing what-the-fuck-ever on a totally different, novel disease.
and a new virus in a previously unexposed population DOES spread more or less exponentially. this is a well known phenomenon. if you weren't so achingly illiterate on the biology then you would KNOW why this is so.
https://mathbench.umd.edu/modules/popn- … page15.htm
here is a fucking maths university site that lays it out very clearly. the first sentence:
but you saidA virus will typically spread exponentially at first if there is no immunization available. Each infected person can infect multiple new people
???That's exponential growth, and it's the absolute worst case scenario. It's also not realistic.
maybe stop being such a condescending goon, jay, and educate yourself out of your ignorance.
Last edited by uziq (2020-03-20 17:26:49)
Hey, you'll be happy to know that the hasidics are the hardest hit in the NYC region right now. Apparently they ignored all the social distancing recommendations.Dilbert_X wrote:
Three times the US deaths in the Vietnam war.
No biggy.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
spread exponentially... at first... until humans reactuziq wrote:
yes jay, i'm a follower. i followed my high-school biology textbook in understanding how the human immune system works.
please go and read a basic summary.
i do question your intelligence because it's taken you 27 pages of a pandemic thread to even grasp that coronavirus is NOT flu. the numbers of people who get infected with swine flu and the numbers who die from it have no bearing what-the-fuck-ever on a totally different, novel disease.
and a new virus in a previously unexposed population DOES spread more or less exponentially. this is a well known phenomenon. if you weren't so achingly illiterate on the biology then you would KNOW why this is so.
https://mathbench.umd.edu/modules/popn- … page15.htm
here is a fucking maths university site that lays it out very clearly. the first sentence:but you saidA virus will typically spread exponentially at first if there is no immunization available. Each infected person can infect multiple new people???That's exponential growth, and it's the absolute worst case scenario. It's also not realistic.
maybe stop being such a condescending goon, jay, and educate yourself out of your ignorance.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
when humans react by washing their hands or whatever else you mention, that changes the rate of change, it doesn't stop it from being exponential in nature. it is a NOVEL disease for which every new contacted person has NO immunity.
the only thing that stops it being exponential in your scenario is when you cap out at > 60-70% on the first wave. that's when herd immunity becomes a factor. it won't naturally settle into a 10% infection rate 'like flu'.
you are actually so frustratingly stupid it's unreal.
the only thing that stops it being exponential in your scenario is when you cap out at > 60-70% on the first wave. that's when herd immunity becomes a factor. it won't naturally settle into a 10% infection rate 'like flu'.
you are actually so frustratingly stupid it's unreal.
Last edited by uziq (2020-03-20 18:08:36)
I'll save you the pain then, you can go back to your circle jerk. You wanna stay stupid and depressed? Feel free.uziq wrote:
when humans react, that changes the rate of change, it doesn't stop it from being exponential in nature. it is a NOVEL disease for which every new contacted person has NO immunity.
the only thing that stops it being exponential is when you cap out at > 60-70% on the first wave. that's when herd immunity becomes a factor.
you are actually so frustratingly stupid it's unreal.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
i'm not depressed at all. and i count knowing how the human immune system works at a schoolchild's level as a small blessing.
'stay stupid'. jay backtrack over the last 2 pages. please. it is a vintage performance from you.
every single graph of total cases, tracked per country, shows a textbook exponential growth curve. it's not even complicated.
the only countries that show different behaviour, i.e. power-law behaviour rather than exponential growth, are china and taiwan and, to a lesser extent, south korea, after implementing total lockdowns and huge tracking efforts. china is obviously now in a situation of exponential decline.
yet you say 'exponential growth is massively unrealistic'. it is literally the norm for new viruses. this doesn't even need complex systems modelling and the use of fancy algorithms: it's a simple assumption of pretty much all epidemiology for all diseases with r-factors >1. because, you know, epidemiologists understand how the human immune system works, and how it fights and has to develop immunities to novel pathogens. you don't understand it, that's fine. go read a book.
need i remind you that you called their work 'bad math' and 'bad extrapolation', yet you have not the slightest idea how viruses even spread and now even question whether their growth is exponential. methinks you are the bad mathematician here. and by 'bad' i mean failed-high-school math bad.
you claiming that coronavirus is no big deal because only a tiny fraction of the US population contract flu each year, a disease that has been inoculated against in the mainstream population for 80 years, really is the piece de resistance. it's like you can't even conceptualise why your 'do nothing and let it blow over' approach would be a disaster with coronavirus. you don't understand that there's no limit to how many people can contract it in this novel scenario. you talk about swine-flu levels of infection in one breath, as if they are even relatable, and then dismiss other's modelling the next.
you are hopeless. please come back to this thread when you have attained the understanding of the age of someone from greta thunberg's class.
'stay stupid'. jay backtrack over the last 2 pages. please. it is a vintage performance from you.
every single graph of total cases, tracked per country, shows a textbook exponential growth curve. it's not even complicated.
the only countries that show different behaviour, i.e. power-law behaviour rather than exponential growth, are china and taiwan and, to a lesser extent, south korea, after implementing total lockdowns and huge tracking efforts. china is obviously now in a situation of exponential decline.
yet you say 'exponential growth is massively unrealistic'. it is literally the norm for new viruses. this doesn't even need complex systems modelling and the use of fancy algorithms: it's a simple assumption of pretty much all epidemiology for all diseases with r-factors >1. because, you know, epidemiologists understand how the human immune system works, and how it fights and has to develop immunities to novel pathogens. you don't understand it, that's fine. go read a book.
need i remind you that you called their work 'bad math' and 'bad extrapolation', yet you have not the slightest idea how viruses even spread and now even question whether their growth is exponential. methinks you are the bad mathematician here. and by 'bad' i mean failed-high-school math bad.
you claiming that coronavirus is no big deal because only a tiny fraction of the US population contract flu each year, a disease that has been inoculated against in the mainstream population for 80 years, really is the piece de resistance. it's like you can't even conceptualise why your 'do nothing and let it blow over' approach would be a disaster with coronavirus. you don't understand that there's no limit to how many people can contract it in this novel scenario. you talk about swine-flu levels of infection in one breath, as if they are even relatable, and then dismiss other's modelling the next.
you are hopeless. please come back to this thread when you have attained the understanding of the age of someone from greta thunberg's class.
Last edited by uziq (2020-03-20 17:59:44)
For one thing you don't extrapolate math from a sample, you extrapolate an estimate or prediction.Jay wrote:
I don't like bad math extrapolated from small sample sizes made into policy.l.
You use math to extrapolate data from a sample into an estimate.
Is 250,000 a big enough sample size? I'm guessing 500,000+ have actually been tested.
If the jews, catholics and muslims could be trimmed thanks to their collective pig-ignorance that would change the world.Hey, you'll be happy to know that the hasidics are the hardest hit in the NYC region right now. Apparently they ignored all the social distancing recommendations.
Might shake the survivors into starting to question their fucking stupid doctrines.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2020-03-20 18:07:50)
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
nothing short of a china-style sustained lockdown will stop the exponential growth of a novel disease with the transmissibility of coronavirus.
it's pretty simple. that's why the best case scenario for us now is to 'flatten the curve'. we are way past containment and stamping out the fire.
jay you proposed letting it all blow over at first. that would have just led to 90% infection and health system collapse.
now you're saying, with these measures to 'flatten the curve' (of that extremely unrealistic exponential growth you dismiss), only 'x' amount will die because you've *checked the notes* for the infection rates of flu and swine flu. you don't realise that the low numbers of total annual infections for those are so low because they are literally diseases that we already inoculate against. that's the endgame we're trying to get to with coronavirus now, dipshit! the vaccine we're trying to stall the disease for! a brand new pathogen with the infection rate and aggression of coronavirus will not naturally plateau at 10-15% of the population getting sick. it is going to make everyone sick, to varying degrees. all novel viruses which are successful enough to achieve a base level of transmissibility (i.e. r0 > 1) will exponentially infect the entire population, given enough time and in absence of proper controls or vaccine.
your paper-napkin math about the amount that will contract it based on swine flu's stats are nonsensical.
it's unreal having to explain this. am i going mad?
it's pretty simple. that's why the best case scenario for us now is to 'flatten the curve'. we are way past containment and stamping out the fire.
jay you proposed letting it all blow over at first. that would have just led to 90% infection and health system collapse.
now you're saying, with these measures to 'flatten the curve' (of that extremely unrealistic exponential growth you dismiss), only 'x' amount will die because you've *checked the notes* for the infection rates of flu and swine flu. you don't realise that the low numbers of total annual infections for those are so low because they are literally diseases that we already inoculate against. that's the endgame we're trying to get to with coronavirus now, dipshit! the vaccine we're trying to stall the disease for! a brand new pathogen with the infection rate and aggression of coronavirus will not naturally plateau at 10-15% of the population getting sick. it is going to make everyone sick, to varying degrees. all novel viruses which are successful enough to achieve a base level of transmissibility (i.e. r0 > 1) will exponentially infect the entire population, given enough time and in absence of proper controls or vaccine.
your paper-napkin math about the amount that will contract it based on swine flu's stats are nonsensical.
it's unreal having to explain this. am i going mad?
Last edited by uziq (2020-03-20 18:44:46)
https://twitter.com/RemiGMI/status/1240 … 66817?s=20
some nice visualisations. good god i hope jay gets it.
some nice visualisations. good god i hope jay gets it.
Last edited by uziq (2020-03-20 19:06:50)
Whoah, the last couple pages.
yes jay literally thinks he has figured out that coronavirus, an exponentially spreading pandemic, will top out at flu rates of infection. or, if it's extra bad, swine flu levels of infection.unnamednewbie13 wrote:
Whoah, the last couple pages.
you know, those annual rates of infection for known, immunised, vaccinated diseases.
Last edited by uziq (2020-03-20 19:14:12)
Context is everything
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
Seems I am a genius, Endgame C looks like the best option.uziq wrote:
amazing that no one has ever thought of that.
new outbreak in single city in china.
dilbert: shut down all flights everywhere until this thing is exterminated.
global pandemic.
dilbert: shut down the entire world for 6 weeks.
it's amazing you haven't been headhunted by an intelligence organization to head up some important crisis agency.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-03-21/ … g/12077096
Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!
i never said it was a dumb option. it’s clearly the most effective option. it also just seemed like the most economically devastating back then, too. you know, dilbert, complex decisions! nuance! weighing many factors! wow this must be complicated for you.
you know, dilbert, people make informed decisions with the information they have at the time. a pandemic scenario, being that magic word, exponential, changes very fast.
good luck trying to get the world’s politicians to jerk the global economy into a nosedive in week 2 of the outbreak in china. evidently all you could convince republican politicians to do at that juncture was rearrange their stocks portfolio.
you know, dilbert, people make informed decisions with the information they have at the time. a pandemic scenario, being that magic word, exponential, changes very fast.
good luck trying to get the world’s politicians to jerk the global economy into a nosedive in week 2 of the outbreak in china. evidently all you could convince republican politicians to do at that juncture was rearrange their stocks portfolio.