• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: Coronavirus Resources - and other things to not worry about

I love when nerds get villainized for not concluding something that hasn't been concluded. FEAR MONGERING!!!!!!

 
Not that I’m siding wit the guy who pretends this is settled but people like bogoch live in a bit of a strange ecosystem. They’re fighting for likes, tv presence and the exposure that comes with it. He’s also a (self created) prominent doctor in a large city and the messaging from the top can’t be “don’t worry about it” because (as has been said) even if this is a milder disease if 4x the people catch it at any point in time it is going to cause capacity constraints. He needs to be measured.

he also needs to be somewhat measured so as to not affect his academic career. Make a mistake and millions in funding can disappear.

I think part of the reason why topol (whose a prolific research fundraiser) can be so unconstrained in his tweets/retweets is that infectious disease is not his expertise. Not the case with a guy like Dr B.
 
Yeah see? People hate reality and the nerds get villainized because they don't conclude what folks want to be concluded. Totally get it. We all want the best. But villainizing scientists for telling the truth ain't it.
 
The anti vax and freedom nuts definitely try to villainize.

But there’s nothing wrong with questioning, because what is being reported is not settled. everybody is looking at the same (noisy) datapoints and trying to make sense of them.

And as much as we want to pretend some of the Twitter experts are benevolent beings benignly posting information as they see it, they’re also fighting for likes and alarmism drums up interest.
 
Again you need to know who to follow. There's a lot of dingalings. I learned long ago you want to avoid those types. But there's a segment of folks who fire off misinformation, minimalization and false hopes. They're equally, if not more dangerous. Monica Gandhi is the "everything is actually fine" version of ding dong. Those people get super internet famous because it's what people want to hear. People love misinformation as long as it means everything is actually fine.

Tldr: anyone who forms aggressive conclusions on incomplete data is a red flag. So far the only people I've seen who have done that are the serial minimalists. The qualified nerds have not said anything one way or another. Just presenting data as it comes.
 
Last edited:
The results of new clinical trials aren’t released every 15 minutes. That leaves a lot space for filler in the high velocity Twitter-sphere, which is a risk for reputations. For this kind of content, it requires relentless discipline and rigour. At some point it must become fatiguing, and it’s easy to slide into laziness, snark and churlish mockery, especially with so many ridiculous hammerheads in the ecosystem.
 
Preston said:
Again you need to know who to follow. There's a lot of dingalings. I learned long ago you want to avoid those types. But there's a segment of folks who fire off misinformation, minimalization and false hopes. They're equally, if not more dangerous. Monica Gandhi is the "everything is actually fine" version of ding dong. Those people get super internet famous because it's what people want to hear. People love misinformation as long as it means everything is actually fine.

Tldr: anyone who forms aggressive conclusions on incomplete data is a red flag. So far the only people I've seen who have done that are the serial minimalists. The qualified nerds have not said anything one way or another. Just presenting data as it comes.
Click to expand...
I don’t follow anybody - I don’t have Twitter - but I know some of the folks you follow and their colleagues and I understand how Twitter works psychologically.

To be clear - im not saying that these folks are wrong and shouldn’t be listened to, but the data SHOULD be questioned right now, and we should always be skeptical of the motivations of Twitter posters.
 
mbow30 said:
I don’t follow anybody - I don’t have Twitter - but I know some of the folks you follow and their colleagues and I understand how Twitter works psychologically.

To be clear - im not saying that these folks are wrong and shouldn’t be listened to, but the data SHOULD be questioned right now, and we should always be skeptical of the motivations of Twitter posters.
Click to expand...
Yup. That's why I present facts and not aggressive opinions on incomplete data. I could fire off chise or Monica Gandhi tweets and we could all live life as if nothing is happening. I suspect folks would have less if an issue with that. Basic human psychology. People like hearing that stuff. That's why they get the most internet famous.
 
At the end of the day people don't like hearing reality when it doesn't suit what they want and I totally get why you want them muted. We all would have loved if Monica Gandhi was right that this thing would have ended after a quick wave in 2020. But it's so far off the mark.
 
“The evidence we have so far points to x but we should be cautious until we have more data” is exactly what scientists should say about a new strain for a while. I’d be cautious of anyone who tweets a piece of information and says it means x definitively. That can often sound negative I suppose to outsiders.
 
And a lot of these guys are advising governments, not that they're listened to. Gotta practice the precautionary principle on basically every issue. Hope is not a strategy.
 
Their delta wave was complete chaos with massive amount of death and overwhelmed hospitals. So far this one appears to be anything but.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top