matz1

Why would I afraid of hanging out in close proximity with unvaccinated individual if I'm vaccinated ?

How is not wanting to be vaccinated is idiot ? Vaccination should be personal preference.

Own preference (whatever that is) is always more important than other preference.

If you don't think your own preference is important then don't complain when other dictate the outcome.

I'm not but many people will interact with people wearing mask differently (knowingly or unknowingly).

Besides, the staff hate the mask but they have to wear because of the policy.

It also contribute to shortage of worker: its already a hard job and now with added mask!

Well, the picture in article showing the staff with mask and face shield!. In texas sadly most of the restaurant wait staff still wear mask.

The Mask policy exacerbate it. It dehumanize person when you can't see their face.

yes assume its just a part of name.

It shouldn't matter if they called beta forever or whatever.

As consumer you should never believe what the company promise anyway.

I would evaluate it myself or refer to trusted third party reviewer based on what it can actually do right now not what it may become.

>I am not sure if there is a better solution

just because you are not sure doesn't mean there is no solution or doesn't mean no body else can't find the solution

>You will either get cops going in without fully assessing the situation or taking too long assessing the situation.

The fallacy is the assume there is only this two situation

>but it seems like you are suggesting there is a way to make it perfect

I never say or demand perfection, only improvement.

>That is holding cops to an impossible solution

You already assume the solution is impossible ?

If the police can't improve the situation then general public should demand whoever in charge to be fired/replaced.

>The police have a solution.

Then the solution is not good enough, they should figure out a better way.

>People don't seem to like it since they go in without fully assessing the situation.

bottom line what the general public want: the cop to handle the situation without causing death

>Since we live in a democratic republic (at least if you live in the US) the general public should decide on the solution.

The general public pay these police from tax to do certain job.

The general public should force whoever in charge of the police to be replaced if they don't do good enough job.

>Lets take a situation where someone reports something like a shootout inside a house. What would you have the cops do in that situation?

How do they handle it in other countries?

>If this is a real event, they don't go in quickly in order to confirm the situation and someone dies because of it would you blame the cops?

Yes i would blame the cops, its the police job to handle the situation without causing someone to dies.

How exactly they should do is for the police to figure out.

You can't expect general public to figure out the solution.

Unfortunately, its consequences of people allowed to have guns.

yes of course it will require significant retrofit. The benefit seems significant compared to the cost for the company: to attract employee to want to work in the office.

faang companies has huge campus which probably mostly empty right now, why don't they built housing inside their own campus ? This will greatly attract their employee to work in the office.

Tax won't necessarily be an issue, the total net cost of my housing can still be cheaper than if I pay it myself.

>And if they fire you you'll have to deal with two of the top ten most stressful life experiences at once

Of course but few thing could be done by the company to minimize the stress. This cons is not significant enough for me.

Why don't the faang companies do it then with their own campus? This will attract large number of employee to go back to office.

Doesn't have to be sharing bathroom.

It can have private bathroom & private kitchen just like regular apartment/studio.

Heres and idea: Want me to go back to office ? Convert some of the space into housing/apartment/living space.

Rent it to employee for free/cheap as benefit.

Not only I'll go back to office, I'll live in the office.

If that true then just sue them, anybody can sue anyone for any reason.

Its called marketing, companies exaggerate claim all the time. As consumer, one should not believe in company marketing claim/promise or they'll be in trouble.

Its a choice, at least for me there is a lot of thing in life that a lot more worrying than 2/10000 risk of preventable death

>The IFR (Infected Fatality Rate4) for the original variant was about 0.01% for those in their 20s and 0.2% for those in their 40

Thanks, so 2x of that is 0.02% and 0.4%, that was my point: 2x of a low rate is still low

The author mentioned the risk is 2x higher but what is the risk of the original variant itself ? The author didn't mention that.

>It looks like the risk of death is 2x higher for Delta than for the original variant:

2x of what ?

2x of low risk is still a low risk.

Human kills already, and yet certainly do not want human to be banned for driving.

I too expect and accept that some accident caused by driverless car that kills kid/animal (that human wouldn't do) will happen (if not already happen). To expect otherwise will be unrealistic.

Well see, I personally accept and support far from perfect no driver at wheel car. I doubt I'm a minority.

To get to the so called "no driver at the wheel" driving you have to go through what you called "driver assist" stage, its a continuous improvement.

So are you saying people accept it in the far from perfect driver stage now but won't accept it when it become so much improved "no driver at the wheel" stage ?

Disagree, Tesla approach is the right approach. You want to test the technology as early as possible in real situation as much as possible.

>They MUST be perfect for the general public to accept them

No they don't, its far from perfect right now yet its available and you can use it right now provided you have money to buy it.

>Mandatory breathalyzer tests before every engine start

We don't do that today and we are still allowing people to drive on the road today.