So you want to run a virtual event | Hacker News Reader

So you want to run a virtual event

blog.lazerwalker.com

34 pointsnkantar14 comments

> You’re desperate to get back to running an in-person event, but you know it isn’t quite safe yet.

> Maybe you’ve seen in-person events in your community lead to large-scale COVID outbreaks or even deaths, and that terrifies you.

This kind of alarmism destroys any credibility the article might have.

(Edit: I posted the above comment two days ago, interesting that the story has been revived and the comment is editable again)

Seriously, Nobody I know is still concerned about events.

I wonder if the article is satire

New York City itself seems concerned..

from today: https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/news/2022/05/17/nyc-hig...

> New Yorkers should “consider avoiding higher-risk activities (such as crowded indoor gatherings)

It will be interesting to see if anybody cares. It's hard to imagine people still taking these public health warnings seriously (even if at some point they should). Remember the "terror alert level"

NY election polls indicate that NY cares strongly about ignoring "health" warnings from those who have lost credibility in the past two years.

The NYC health commissioner tweeted:

> We don’t anticipate that this wave will last much longer, so hang in there, New York City. If we all do our part, we can bring case numbers down in the coming weeks and get ready for a wonderful summer.

Two weeks to flatten the curve! I don't know what planet anyone would have to be on to consider them remotely credible. It's actually infuriating if you think about it.

https://mobile.twitter.com/NYCHealthCommr/status/15262236119...

The articles is a bit dramatic, but if, say, over 40s, folks with kids or elderly parents, they tend to avoid the risks.

If I have to isolate a few days, and then my kids too, even if we're not worried for our health, it's a major annoyance for work.

That being said, I don't like virtual events at all, but I'll also be picky about in-person events, because of time and travel environmental impact.

wikipedia page says otherwise https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_pandemic#/media/File:...

Yeah, I really do find this kind of attitude strange. If it's not safe now, it never will be. Guess a large portion of society is still waiting for COVID to be "over", as if the virus will magically disappear.

> Yeah, I really do find this kind of attitude strange. If it's not safe now, it never will be. Guess a large portion of society is still waiting for COVID to be "over", as if the virus will magically disappear.

It never will be safe. That means figuring out how to live with COVID, not behaving as if COVID doesn't exist.

>(Edit: I posted the above comment two days ago, interesting that the story has been revived and the comment is editable again)

That's part of HN's "second chance" queue[1], which bumps up old and interesting stories. For whatever reason it also adjusts the timestamps.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11662380

I keep on hearing from friends who went to a conference for the first time in two years... and came back with Covid.

We're going through a nasty spike in the Santa Clara Covid sewage charts right now - I trust those over most other sources because they're more reliable than self-reported testing numbers: https://twitter.com/covidsewage/status/1526566135734206464

Maybe you're relatively young and you don't know/live-with anyone that's at high risk. Good for you. That doesn't mean everyone else has the same risk tolerance as you. My wife's (healthy) friend/classmate in nursing school contracted COVID, spent 2 months in the hospital and subsequently died last year. My 10 year old son is a type 1 diabetic. While he's now vaccinated, we still try to avoid large gatherings.

Just because your risk tolerance is higher than other people doesn't mean you have to be an asshole about it.

There is a strong chance this is response to the covid outbreak that occurred as a result of GDC this year. An outbreak occurred because a knowingly infected individual decided to surreptitiously interact with other conference-goers rather than stay in their hotel room. Do conference makers have a responsibility when creating systems and policies and the effects of those policies including the decision to have an in-person event? That's my read at least.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com