This is a super important read. There is a human cost to all decisions and “relative” costs matter.https://twitter.com/phil_hellmuth/status/1240711426328514561 …
-
-
-
Replying to @rogerdickey @bgurley
Yikes, having strong opinions on a plausible worst case scenario where a massive number of lives are lost, is a religious issue?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @harjtaggar @bgurley
Strong opinions based on weak facts gets religious fast. Very yikes. Caution is great, panic is not. I am more afraid of the alarmists than the virus itself.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @rogerdickey @bgurley
Bad heuristics, you're applying the right model for when the cost to wait for better facts is low. That's true 99% of the time, not now. Panic is rational.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @harjtaggar @bgurley
It will definitely seem justified after the fact. If we're all fine - the panic saved us. If we all die - the panic was right.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
More to your point - the real, economic impact of these shutdowns is devastating. We have a duty to try hard to react proportionately to the real risk, however we measure that, not to share pictures of exponential graphs and flip out. Hope more of us can do the former.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Sharing exponential graphs for a threat that grows expoentially isn't proportionate? No-one disagrees economic shutdown is devastating. An informed response is pushing for more testing so we can safely relax shutdown and federal aid. Not pretending the danger is exaggerated.
-
-
Replying to @harjtaggar @bgurley
In SV we always think things will grow exponentially. Often in practice the graphs don't look as steep. Spot testing - not just testing sick people - is certainly important and we should do more.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. 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.