learc83

Normal healthy children who don't develop a severe case aren't treated at all, so talking about early treatment is irrelevant. I literally just talked about this with a close family member who is a Children's ER doctor.

>And isolation of sick patient from viral reservoir (such as fomites and other asymptomatic sick) is known to be important too, as it changes the viral inoculum dose.

This isn't known to be important. If a person has been infected long enough that they are already symptomatic then "viral inoculum dose" is irrelevant.

It depends on where you are. If you have a low enough case count and a well functioning health department that is doing contact tracing, then it's helpful to confirm that your kid is positive.

If you're in an area where neither of those things apply then, for a child a test isn't going to change anything. It's not going to change their treatment. If it's positive they'll tell you to isolate, but if it's negative, there's a high enough false negative rate, and there are enough cases that it's still very likely they have it, so you'll still want to treat it like they do.

Conservative people are much more likely to live in rural areas. Liberals in more urban areas. Viruses spread much more effectively in higher population densities.

So you'd really need to look at per capita infection rates and control for density, not absolute numbers.

For some anecdata, in my moderate county we have a mask mandate. The surrounding less populated and much more conservative areas don't. Since the mask mandate was put in place more than half of the cases in my county's hospitals have been from the surrounding counties. Despite that fact that they have an order of magnitude fewer people, and despite that fact that we have far more people living in poverty in absolute terms than they do.

>My child had a fever a few weeks ago, it was an ORDEAL finding a place to get him tested. You have to be quite motivated.

That's because the test won't change anything. If it's positive, they'll tell you to isolate your kid. If it's negative, there's a high enough false negative rate that you'll still need to basically treat them like they have COVID (stay home and isolate).

I'm sure that not literally everyone at a Nazi rally is actually a Nazi. But the Unite the Right rally and posters were full of actual Nazi symbols. There were enough Nazi and white power symbols that anyone marching there is either:

1. Anti white supremacist and Anti Nazi, but VERY dumb or very unobservant.

2. Anti white supremacist and Anti Nazi, but believe that saving a statue is worth marching in a rally on the same side as a large number of self professed Nazis.

3. A white supremist and/or Nazi.

This wasn't a case of a few white supremacist sneaking into an otherwise unrelated event. A large percentage of the crowd was chanting overtly racist slogans and flying overtly racist flags (even ignoring the confederate battle flags). No one there was confused about what was happening. None of the people marching on the Unite the Right side were "very fine people."

Same here except that I'm using neovim. I recently retired the Linux server I used to remotely access from my Windows desktop to do dev work on.

> I'm always direct when pointing out that I left the South partially because of discrimination

Any reasonable person who reads will infer that "the South" is that thing that is discriminatory in general. If you instead meant something else you worded it very poorly.

I honestly have a hard time believing that you don't understand how the sentence "I left X because of Y." implies that X is Y.

"I left my marriage because of domestic violence." It's entirely possible to construct a meaning where your spouse wasn't the one beating you, but that's the logical inference.

If you didn't intend to generalize that the South is discriminatory overall then why didn't you just say: I left my hometown because of discrimination? What additional meaning does "the South" add to that if you really just mean:

"I left my home town because of discrimination. My hometown happens to be in the South, but I don't think the South at large is any more or less discriminatory than any other region."

>All that said, I do think there are accurate generalizations you can make about the South, or any large region.

Sure. I don't think you can based on the experience of having lived in one tiny area of that region.

>Forsyth County, for instance, is definitely exurban and just as definitely part of the Atlanta metropolitan area.

Exurban is one step away from farmland. The differences between Cumming and say the area around Little Five Points is much greater than the difference between that same area of Atlanta and San Francisco.

What point? That living in one small exurb in the South gives them enough experience to generalize a region of 125 million people?

I'm not explaining your experience to you. I'm telling you that your experience growing up in 1 place doesn't give you the ability to generalize a entire region.

>exurban Atlanta

Exurban Atlanta is not Atlanta. That's like saying the Jersey Shore is Manhattan.

>I'm making it all up and the South is perfectly open and tolerant.

I'm sure you're not. But "the South" is diverse. Atlanta has a very large LGBT community (both in absolute terms and as a percentage) and culture that is completely different from areas just an hour away. It's very possible that you and the people you are talking to had completely different experiences.

Both of you are almost certainly overgeneralizing your experiences when you say "the South".

People who live in the South get upset that the country likes to pretend that the rest of the country outside a few urban centers is any different. That is, if you had left the South for the rural or suburban Midwest or most of Pennsylvania, you'd likely have had a similar experience.

In your example company, I think remote work may have been the catalyst for the change you’re talking about in the specific case. But what if they’d introduced some other small change that had nothing to do with remote work like moving the conference rooms to the other side of the building so that people not in a conference couldn’t easily tell there was a meeting going on. Each time the environment changes, new building, new project etc... we don’t think it’s necessary to have had a different culture from the beginning or to completely remake the culture from the ground up. We just make the appropriate changes.

Culture has to adapt to the environment. There’s nothing special about it being remote.

If you have an open office and everyone is constantly having loud, impromptu meetings in the same space, that’s just as much of a problem.

The Linux kernel and most other open source projects have primarily been built by fully remote teams. But every few days there’s a thread full of people wringing their hands about how there’s no way to do spontaneous, creative, collaborative work remotely.

> Given some circumstance or set of them, the overwhelming vast majority of people are capable of extreme violence.

If you consider circumstances where society would generally consider violence justified then maybe.

Historically even in combat only a small percentage of people would intentionally shoot to kill.

You can buy a cheap MP3 player for $5 as long as you don’t mind loading it up manually.

The hierarchy in a game object scene graph tends to be much shallower than a UI hierarchy, so I’m not sure if that is a good comparison.

I don’t know. Unity is completely redoing their UI stack, so I don’t think even they are happy with the current incarnation.

I usually don’t have to throttle my thoughts with video conferencing unless there are more than 1 or 2 other people on the conference. But when there are more than 3 people in a conference room, I have to throttle my thoughts there as well.

It gets easier. I’ve been working remotely for a decade, and eventual you learn to communicate differently to mostly avoid these issues.

One argument is that increases in necessities like healthcare, and rent are offset by decreases in things like the cost of consumer electronics.

So the inflation rate doesn’t give you a good picture of the actual increase in the cost of living.

Maybe they believe that No. 2 is capable of making valuable contributions, but that the specific contributions made at the direction of the Zen founder aren’t valuable.

So in your scenario, kicking out a spy and confiscating their US based property is a form of warfare?

>senior: no tactical, very vague strategic (normally coming from business partners).

>Maybe that's just me, though.

That's just you. I agree that's probably closer to how the terminology should work, but it doesn't. I'm unaware of any large company where senior engineers are getting direction directly from business partners.

You're lucky if "senior" engineers have 3 years of experience.

Where are you looking? I don’t even see a Space for ads.

The EU was always wary of the US. But when it comes to picking between China and the US, there’s no chance they pick China without some kind of massive currently unpredicted Chinese reforms.

Chinese GDP growth has slowed dramatically, and it’s GDP per capita is still at the level of Mexico. It’s population is projected to decline dramatically, and it has a very unfavorable age distribution.

It probably won’t get more than some small multiple larger than the US economy and it may never approach the US in GDP per capita.

My point is that the the imbalance is unlikely to get large enough that they US keep fielding a credible nuclear threat.

So again what has changed that makes conventional war between nuclear powers likely or possible.

A country avoids nuclear exchanges because retaliation will also devastate it. An integrated economy isn’t going be any more of a deterrent in this respect. If a country is willing to deal with nuclear devastation they are certainly willing to deal with economically damaging themselves.

As far as proxy wars go is trade going to stop those? History has examples of proxy wars fought between countries that engaged in trade.

I don’t know. Our economy was almost completely decoupled from the Soviet Union and that never turned into a shooting war. What’s different this time that is going to overcome MAD and allow for a conventional war?

>It doesn't take much effort to find current instances of sword, famine, and plague.

And yet those things are affecting fewer people proportionally than at any time in recorded history.

The last shared cultural "moment" was much more recent--the COVID lockdown.

This isn't screening to get in, it's screening to leave. So your shift ends at 5, and they make you wait in a line to get out the door--after you'd already clocked out. And yes, you would be threatened with termination if you didn't wait in the security line