"Random" sometimes denotes uniform random, other times it means non-uniform random, perhaps satisfying positivity for some population — hopefully yielding what is sometimes called a probability sample. One has to rely on context a bit.
-
-
But I still disagree wholeheartedly with the idea that our current approach doesn't give any valuable information
-
Well I agree we learn a lot even by convenience testing... I'm arguing we could learn more per test conducted and still address the I'll w/ SRS or active learning, using antibody tests w/ clinical follow up, especially given evidence of asymptotic transmission.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
So, yes, but I learned a *ton*, so thank you...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
you seem to not even be able to consider the possibility that this is a good idea despite the fact that some forms of it are being implemented globally. I'm simply saying can't we consider some systematic surveillance testing. Your position seems dogmatic to me.