Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

OK, the Corona Virus Isn't Going Away. Now What?


Recommended Posts



  • Replies 1.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

I'm very skeptical of miracle cures. My wife died from cancer and many of the "out of the box" treatments appeared promising at first, but ultimately, some were useless and it was very likely that one of them was what killed her, not the cancer.

 

From a practical standpoint, people need to realize doctors are not in control of this, lawyers are. If people start dying after being administered a particular drug, there could be lawsuit after lawsuit that would drag out in the courts for years. I think it would be hard to lose such a lawsuit, if inadequate or sloppy testing was proven to have happened.

 

Doctors are put in a very difficult position, for a variety of reasons. Also doctors are not above wanting publicity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Update...apparently doctors are prescribing hydroxychloroquine, because it's legal for some illnesses and can be prescribed off-label based on a doctor's judgement. So the current positioning makes sense - the government says more testing is needed, so pharmaceutical companies are off the hook ("sorry you died of heart complications, but the government told you not to, so that's on you"). Meanwhile, spontaneous "under-the-radar tests" can help determine the efficacy, although the jury is out (and will be out for a while).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't get me wrong, I love doctors, but they don't all seem to understand the scientific method nor double-blind studies. I've seen too many times where a doctor will say something like, "my patients seem to respond toâ¦" or other such anecdotal "evidence." I'm not saying they're wrong, lots of science came from investigating reports like that, but it's not enough to say that it's a scientifically proven fact.

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/04/hydroxychloroquine-trump/609547/

 

Two weeks ago, French doctors published a provocative observation in a microbiology journal. In the absence of a known treatment for COVID-19, the doctors had taken to experimentation with a potent drug known as hydroxychloroquine. For decades, the drug has been used to treat malariaâwhich is caused by a parasite, not a virus. In six patients with COVID-19, the doctors combined hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin (known to many as 'Z-Pak,' an antibiotic that kills bacteria, not viruses) and reported that after six days of this regimen, all six people tested negative for the virus.

 

The report caught the eye of the celebrity doctor Mehmet Oz, who has since appeared on Fox News to talk about hydroxychloroquine 21 times. As Oz put it to Sean Hannity, 'This French doctor, [Didier] Raoult, a very famous infectious-disease specialist, had done some interesting work at a pilot study showing that he could get rid of the virus in six days in 100 percent of the patients he treated.' Raoult has made news in recent years as a pan-disciplinary provocateur; he has questioned climate change and Darwinian evolution. On January 21, at the height of the coronavirus outbreak in China, Raoult said in a YouTube video, 'The fact that people have died of coronavirus in China, you know, I don"t feel very concerned.' Last week, Oz, who has been advising the president on the coronavirus, described Raoult to Hannity as 'very impressive.' Oz told Hannity that he had informed the White House as much.

 

Anthony Fauci is not among the impressed. The day the study came out, Fauci, the leading infectious-disease expert advising the White House"s coronavirus task force, downplayed the findings as 'anecdotal.' The report was not a randomized clinical trialâone in which many people are followed to see how their health fares, not simply whether a virus is detectable. And Oz"s '100 percent' interpretation involves conspicuous omissions. According to the study itself, three other patients who received hydroxychloroquine were too sick to be tested for the virus by day six (they were intubated in the ICU). Another had a bad reaction to the drug and stopped taking it. Another was not tested because, by day six, he had died.

"I'm so crazy, I don't know this is impossible! Hoo hoo!" - Daffy Duck

 

"The good news is that once you start piano you never have to worry about getting laid again. More time to practice!" - MOI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, double-blind studies on humans when lives could be lost are completely unethical. Virtually no doctor will want to say, either the folks in group A or B will be cured and the unlucky group will die.

 

Neither will they want to say, "we don't have enough ventilators and other supplies, I chose you to be treated and sentence you to death." It's not what they are trained to do.

 

I hope the governments of the world learn a lesson to put lives in front of personal profit and politics, but history tells me that's not likely.

 

I figure, the world will recover, some positive changes will be made, and in time, those with the most profits to be made will slowly erode them.

 

It's not the first plague, nor will it be the last.

 

Insights and incites by Notes

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is, double-blind studies on humans when lives could be lost are completely unethical. Virtually no doctor will want to say, either the folks in group A or B will be cured and the unlucky group will die.

 

Neither will they want to say, "we don't have enough ventilators and other supplies, I chose you to be treated and sentence you to death." It's not what they are trained to do.

My wife works for the top cancer treatment center in the country. They do clinical trials of new cancer drugs all the time. The patients are offered to be part of the appropriate trials, and they know they might get a placebo. It's the only way they can be sure the stuff works vs. the placebo effect.

 

Besides, there's another flaw in your statement. Giving a patient a drug when you don't know if it will help might be letting them die as well. In fact, some of these drugs might have terrible side effects, including death. IOW, if the disease is deadly and the drug doesn't work, people from both groups could have the same chance of dying, or those taking the drug might have a higher one.

 

If the patients (or their families) are told of the risks of participating in the study and are allowed to make the decision whether to be a part of it or not, that's completely ethical. It's only unethical when they are not informed, don't have a choice, are experimented on without their consent.

 

Of course all doctors want to save lives. They don't want to do any harm (the Hippocratic Oath), but unfortunately this damned thing has forced some of them to make incredibly tough decisions.

"I'm so crazy, I don't know this is impossible! Hoo hoo!" - Daffy Duck

 

"The good news is that once you start piano you never have to worry about getting laid again. More time to practice!" - MOI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some random thoughts on what might be different on other side, provoked a few comments in the financial press.

 

Capital will be in short supply and taxes higher for many years to get deficits back under control.

 

So the death of tech start ups that have always lost money and rely on constant capital injections to survive, like Uber. At the end of the day the it is just an app so easily replicated and replaced by smaller ride share co ops or similar with the app developer getting paid per download or as a subscription service.

 

Read somewhere that after past pandemics the pendalum swings to placing a higher value on labour compared to capital. So wage compression with the top end getting a lower multiple of what the average worker gets. Already happening here with a raft of newly appointed bank CEO's getting less than their predecessors.

 

Reading recently about Rimac, a Croation start up producing EV tech for exotic hyper cars and now Porsche and Hyundai. The founder said that he gets three times the average pay of his employees while in the US it is 287 times the pay of the average worker in the company they run.

 

A lot more folk working from home more often. Which requires employers to have greater trust in their workforce. And you don't have trust without respect.

 

Here banks are being forced to give those affected by the pandemic mortgage payment holidays, lower interest rates, foreclosure is banned and landords cannot evict tenants. Banks have been told to suspend dividend payments. Insurers have voluntarily waived pandemic exclusions. So capital is being forced to bend to social needs. Part of this readjustment may be become the norm on the other side.

 

Low interest rates for a long time to come.

 

The extent of this type of change will vary be country and be influenced by the collective mores. Obviously I am influenced by my local environment but to a greater or lesser extent some or all will occur globally.

A misguided plumber attempting to entertain | MainStage 3 | Axiom 61 2nd Gen | Pianoteq | B5 | XK3c | EV ZLX 12P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Concerning the debate about Chloroquine, I just saw an interview yesterday with a doctor who is another infectious disease specialist who says the idea that you cannot use drugs that have not gone though human trials is basically bogus. He rattled off several drugs that never went through these sorts of trials. His opinion is Chloroquine is effective. Many other doctors have said the same thing and he thinks Faucci is being too conservative about this. And, it's only being given to the worst patients, the ones who are on ventilators already and declining. It can't be used on everybody yet anyway because that drug has been used for years for Lupus and other serious illnesses not just malaria. We cannot take that drug away from other patients who've already been using it for these other things. And that's another reason to not worry too much about side effects and such, this is not a new drug it's very well known. Like any other drug, your doctor will decide if it's appropriate for you or not.

 

Also the reason individual doctors have so much authority about stuff like this is because they're on the front lines. Years ago, I had read a fairly detailed article about a situation I had at the time and that article referenced a study about it that worried me. I called my doctor about it and he took down the exact information and called me back a week later to say he researched that study and didn't like their methodology, he said it was incomplete and a little sloppy. That was my first real life experience you can't believe everything you read concerning medicine. It's like my doctor at the VA two years ago didn't like the results a local clinic had produced that had been contracted by the VA. His comment was similar, their report was incomplete and sloppy in his opinion so he had me come into the VA's West LA facility to have it done again and the results were much better.

 

The medical field is very complex like so many things in our modern world, you can't just make blanket statements like the drug companies only care about profits or you only believe one doctor because he happens to be up there in news conferences next to the President. Faucci has a great reputation but even at his high level there are many different opinions from other esteemed doctors at his same level. We all just have to read and digest these things for ourselves, listen to our personal doctors, get second opinions and make our own decisions.

 

Bob

Hammond SK1, Mojo 61, Kurzweil PC3, Korg Pa3x, Roland FA06, Band in a Box, Real Band, Studio One, too much stuff...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help but notice that the discussion here is more informed and balanced, exhibits more sensitivity, and considers more points of view that anything I'm seeing in the media. No wonder I like to hang out here.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help but notice that the discussion here is more informed and balanced, exhibits more sensitivity, and considers more points of view that anything I'm seeing in the media. No wonder I like to hang out here.

 

Agreed. I attempted to participate in another forum discussing this topic and it keeps going off the rails while the moderators there take a more or less "hands off" approach. I've left that thread to suffer and die on it's own.

 

Since we are now discussing the possibilities of the future of the world and our country, I will bring up something that may seem off topic but I feel is relevant.

 

There is a HUGE change coming in terms of how labor is performed. It's been right in front of us for some time but CV_19 may accelerate the changes for one significant reason. Machinery does not get sick, that is how this stays on topic.

 

Robots are coming, lots of robots. China is way ahead of us there, despite what would be considered relatively low labor costs the Chinese are replacing workers with robots where and when possible.

It will happen here, just a matter of time. Nvidia has robots in R&D that are learning how to do things by watching humans do them, AI enabled. No lengthy coding needed to mandate procedures. Eventually, robots will "train" other robots in the same fashion.

I worked a temp job as a printer a few years ago and they already had a robotic system in place for producing finished boxes for their products. The cardboard was already die cut, the robot place the cardboard, glued all labels on in one operation and folded the box as need in the next. I ran that robot a couple of times, it could produce lots of boxes, did not get a paycheck or call out sick.

 

The other big piece of the puzzle? 3d printing. Recent developments have increased production speeds.

 

Manufacturing may move back to the USA to save on shipping but they will eventually have robots running 3d printers instead of humans.

It will engender HUGE changes in life around the world. How we adjust a "consumer based" economy when consumers have reduced or non-existent income paths is going to be an interesting challenge.

 

So I am glad that I am old!!! I'd hate to be in the "workforce" 10 years from now. Cheers, Kuru

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't find the article right now, so I'll do my best off the top of my head to recall and explain to the best of my ability what I read. It started by stating that Ventilators are the wrong treatment for Covid-19 and may be partially to blame for some of the lung damage because they put pressure on the lungs where what is needed is pure oxygen at low pressure, and ultimately the underlying problem isn't even a lung issue. It also explains why Chloroquine may be effective.

 

The article stated that the virus attacks the Hemoglobin. There is an Iron Ion attached to the Hemoglobin that allows it to pick up an Oxygen molecule when it passes through your lungs. The virus attaches to the Hemoglobin and it loses that Iron Ion so that it can no longer pick up Oxygen and your oxygen saturation drops. This causes all kinds of problems, along with the now free Ions in the blood stream, and effects your vital organs. Your body has to make new hemoglobin and remove the bad stuff.

 

Malaria is not a virus, but it feeds on hemoglobin. The theory is that in the same way chloroquine protects the hemoglobin from malaria, it also prevents the virus from attaching.

 

Of course I haven't seen this widely reported over verified by anybody, so take it for what it is worth - one person's educated opinion.

Dan

 

Acoustic/Electric stringed instruments ranging from 4 to 230 strings, hammered, picked, fingered, slapped, and plucked. Analog and Digital Electronic instruments, reeds, and throat/mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't help but notice that the discussion here is more informed and balanced, exhibits more sensitivity, and considers more points of view that anything I'm seeing in the media. No wonder I like to hang out here.

The media has no interest in balance, they always have an agenda. Case in point, one media source recently suggested (and that was their headline) that the drug was promoted by a certain person very high in the government (guess who) because they had a financial interest in the drug. Buried in the story was the fact that the holdings are somewhere between $100 and $1500. That's right...at the very most a measly $1500.

 

Since the virus has arrived my trust in the media is eroded even further (something I never thought possible) and in addition I no longer use Facebook. I used to use it to promote my bands but since we're not gigging there's no point going on there only to see people post misleading or outright false media stories all day long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I nuked facebook when I found out that they were using each person's likes/dislikes, robotic reading of each person's posts for key words, tallying up the data from all the games and quizzes each person plays and deciding their political bias. If they were strong liberal or conservative they were left alone but if they seemed to be sitting on the fence they put a barrage of fraudulent "news" in their inbox in order to rig a US Presidential election. I don't call it "Fake News" with the intention is clearly fraud. Fake seems to minimize the seriousness of the crime.

 

Now I don't care if they were rigging it for the candidate I liked or the candidate I disliked, using fraud to manipulate a US election is against my principles. I decided that if I continued to let them profit off my data it would make me an accessory to the crime. These are not my values and it's against my personal ethics. As a patriot I find it repulsive.

 

So I researched how to delete my data before nuking my account, and did so.

 

Now I know I'm missing promotional opportunities for my duo http://www.s-cats.com but I have to live with my conscience.

 

As far as news is concerned, almost all news is biased. Sadly during the Reagan administration they nuked the Fairness Doctrine that required news programs to air both sides of an argument and to clearly label anything editorial as editorial and not news. This led to the propagandization of the 4th estate.

 

Knowing news is biased, I use this chart from Politifact, a Pulitizer Prize winning fact checking organization. They show no political bias. Anything to the left of The Atlantic or the right of The Hill in the chart I consider propaganda and not news. For example Fox gets an 8% pure truth rating and 60% from Mostly False to Pants On Fire. MSNBC is slightly better with 9% pure truth and 46% from Mostly False to Pants On Fire.

 

Even between The Atlantic and The Hill I don't expect 100% truth, but it's the best I can do. I compare different sources and take everything with the proverbial grain of salt.

 

http://www.nortonmusic.com/pix/News_Reputations.jpg

 

A person who ignores the news is uninformed, and a person who watches and/or reads the news is misinformed. (Paraphrased from a Mark Twain quote.)

 

To get back on topic, what next?

 

I do hope live music which was already in trouble before the plague doesn't get any worse. It's how I make my living.

 

Insights and incites by Notes

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted to follow up on my previous post. Some medical professionals are discounting some of what I had said about the hemoglobin. May be fake news - felt it my responsibility to report that. HOWEVER there is still increasing medical professionals questioning the use of ventilators and acknowledging the damage they do. Also, increasing data on Hydrochloroquine coupled with some antibiotics and zinc. I'll leave it at that. Research research research. You can find a variety of opinions that are in opposition but all from reputable medical professionals. Anyone with an agenda can hand select whichever ones they want.

Dan

 

Acoustic/Electric stringed instruments ranging from 4 to 230 strings, hammered, picked, fingered, slapped, and plucked. Analog and Digital Electronic instruments, reeds, and throat/mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also be careful of those memes that claim which news sources are trustworthy. I have a FB friend that uses that one all the time but is very obviously on one side of the spectrum politically. It doesn't tell the whole story in account. It doesn't separate hard news shows from editorial shows. It doesn't differentiate fact checking on political pieces from others. Also it is based on the bias of the person who created it. Don't let ANYBODY (including ME) tell you who to trust. Do your due diligence checking multiple sources and make up your own mind using common sense and intellect. I trust you to come to the right conclusion given all the information (even if we disagree - we have different philosophies and that's a GOOD thing).

Dan

 

Acoustic/Electric stringed instruments ranging from 4 to 230 strings, hammered, picked, fingered, slapped, and plucked. Analog and Digital Electronic instruments, reeds, and throat/mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also be careful of those memes that claim which news sources are trustworthy. I have a FB friend that uses that one all the time but is very obviously on one side of the spectrum politically. It doesn't tell the whole story in account. It doesn't separate hard news shows from editorial shows. It doesn't differentiate fact checking on political pieces from others. Also it is based on the bias of the person who created it. Don't let ANYBODY (including ME) tell you who to trust. Do your due diligence checking multiple sources and make up your own mind using common sense and intellect. I trust you to come to the right conclusion given all the information (even if we disagree - we have different philosophies and that's a GOOD thing).

 

Another great post. If I'm ever in St. Louis again, I'm looking you up...

 

Especially if you're gigging :)

 

I don't trust any media, and not necessarily because they have obvious agendas. People hunger for binary results - this one "good," this one "bad." Matters are far more nuanced than that, and the law of unintended consequences reigns supreme. Newscasts seldom plumb those kinds of depths.

 

The choice is rarely between which option is the best of all possible worlds. It's like television, where the shows that survive are LOP - "least objectionable programming" (they really call it that, I didn't make it up). There are often no good answers, only less objectionable ones. The only way we can be sure we arrive at the right answers is to be able to predict the future...and that ain't happening.

 

As a consultant, companies often want answers. Instead, I usually have to present them with choices: If A, then X. If B, then Y. If C, then Z. That's often not what they want to hear, but the reality is they'll have to choose among X, Y, and Z, because those are the options.

 

One thing I learned about cancer with my dead wife is that some alternative therapies DO work - for some people, but not for others .There's no "one size fits all" that I've been able to identify. It wouldn't surprise me if corona virus is the same way. With cancer, it becomes a race - can you find the answer faster than the cancer can kill you? We might be in the same situation with the virus.

 

Or maybe not.

 

Or maybe so.

 

And we may be in the same situation about how soon we can put this behind us...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Norton...that chart is a complete joke. It has NYT, CNN, MSNBC, and WashPo right in the middle.

 

 

Part of my point, they are politically biased, but pretty accurate on non-political. Then look at somebody like NPR who does a LOT of non-political stories so they score high. If you look at non-political hard news on CNN and NPR they are very accurate. But that doesn't tell the whole story. Same with Fox. People like Hannity and Tucker Carlson are for sure biased and would make the channel seem hard right, but the hard news segments are pretty fair, just like the hard news segments on other outlets. People have lost their ability to differentiate hard news from editorial or news analysis.

Dan

 

Acoustic/Electric stringed instruments ranging from 4 to 230 strings, hammered, picked, fingered, slapped, and plucked. Analog and Digital Electronic instruments, reeds, and throat/mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will mention that I also recently left Fakebook.

There are reasons it is convenient and reasons why it is the worst possible human sewer.

I'd unfollowed just about everybody who posted. You do have to google how to delete Fakebook, they would prefer you simply deactivate it.

Don't like 'em and that's that.

 

To get any sort of larger picture, we must also consider news sources from other countries, as many as possible. The perspective can be useful.

It should never be forgotten that news in the United States is entirely financed by advertising and the companies who advertise do have agendas.

 

Choose your poison but don't drink the Kool-Aid.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not trying to blow smoke up your ass, but the compliments have me a little giddy given that I have your books and have used your circuits many times over the years, often with my own modifications given that I'm an electrical engineer. But they don't focus a lot on application specific analog electronics that apply to music. I took an advanced analog electronics class that, even though it was only offered every other semester, only had 5 of us in the class. I'm glad we covered OTA's at least, but the guy spent half the damn semester on Tunnel Diodes. In my whole life since I've never come across a tunnel diode.

Dan

 

Acoustic/Electric stringed instruments ranging from 4 to 230 strings, hammered, picked, fingered, slapped, and plucked. Analog and Digital Electronic instruments, reeds, and throat/mouth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The other big piece of the puzzle? 3d printing. Recent developments have increased production speeds.

3D printers have been repurposed here to make headbands for PPE. Their ability for rapid switch in products manufactured is aleady making a difference.

A misguided plumber attempting to entertain | MainStage 3 | Axiom 61 2nd Gen | Pianoteq | B5 | XK3c | EV ZLX 12P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Norton...that chart is a complete joke. It has NYT, CNN, MSNBC, and WashPo right in the middle.

 

I wouldn't go that far but I agree that comparing the 4 above media outlets to NPR, Reuters, and Associated Press is innacurate at best

:nopity:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never said the middle spots were accurate. But the ones to the left and right of them are much worse, and not even believable.

 

The chart was made with extensive fact checking of the pundits on those outlets. The ones in the middle told the least amount of lies.

 

Basically, be skeptical of all, but if you are outside the middle groups, just don't believe it at all.

 

Notes

Bob "Notes" Norton

Owner, Norton Music http://www.nortonmusic.com

Style and Fake disks for Band-in-a-Box

The Sophisticats http://www.s-cats.com >^. .^< >^. .^<

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That Politifact would put out a chart like that reflects poorly on Politifact, IMO. Serving up pre-digested bias and and trying to tell people what to believe when theoretically at least, they should be capable of observing for themselves and making up their own minds. Which media outlets are most often successfully sued for false stories, slander etc.? Which ones most often have to retract their stories, and how transparent are they at doing that? Which ones, over a period of time, are consistently wrong in their predictions? Which ones consistently separate, "quarantine", if you will, their editorializing and commentary from their hard news reporting? It's all so muddled nowadays.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The other big piece of the puzzle? 3d printing. Recent developments have increased production speeds.

3D printers have been repurposed here to make headbands for PPE. Their ability for rapid switch in products manufactured is aleady making a difference.

 

 

Yes, very versatile. Tooling to commit to manufacturing is not required. Print a couple of the proposed item, test those and fix or proceed.

In 2014 I worked for a company that makes interiors for aircraft. I ran a Stratasys 3d printer, it was used to make prototypes for parts. The company was paying about $2k per prototype and waiting 6 weeks to get a couple for testing. They bought the printer and started making them in house. It was slow, often we would set it up, hit the go button at the end of the day and go home since a part could take several hours to print. Still, a 3 day turnaround instead of 6 weeks. Eventually they got FAA approval to use some of the parts we printed. I was gone shortly thereafter but I'd guess it's more than paid for itself a while back.

It took a chunk of my life to get here and I am still not sure where "here" is.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People have lost their ability to differentiate hard news from editorial or news analysis.

 

Sadly during the Reagan administration they nuked the Fairness Doctrine that required news programs to air both sides of an argument and to clearly label anything editorial as editorial and not news. This led to the propagandization of the 4th estate.

 

It's hard to tell when some of these outlets are deliberately hiding the difference from us. :(

"I'm so crazy, I don't know this is impossible! Hoo hoo!" - Daffy Duck

 

"The good news is that once you start piano you never have to worry about getting laid again. More time to practice!" - MOI

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep asking myself why (I would say most) media are soooo vested in a particular mindset, candidate, etc. What's in it for them?

 

I think I have the answer...they're not appealing to someone's quest for knowledge, but to someone who wants to belong to a tribe. People want to be on the winning side, so once they decide which side they're on, they'll do anything to justify being on that side - it's wrapped up in their own identity.

 

With sports teams, when the team is winning people say "we're winning." When the team is losing, people say "they're losing." Ultimately, it has to do with people's insecurities and fear of being "wrong."

 

But again, it's not that easy to distill situations to "this is definitely good" and "this is definitely bad." There are just too many shades of gray for most people to accommodate. It's like if everyone had different criteria for deciding the winning team. Person A says their baseball team won because it has the most hits. Person B said their team won because they had the least number of strikeouts. Person C said their team won because it had the fewest errors.

 

To relate this to the OP, the unfortunate aspect of this societal fracturing is that it makes it hard to learn from one's mistakes. It's getting to the point where it seems to me that people are interested in finding fault for fault's sake to reinforce their "team," not in order to avoid repeating the same mistakes in the future. An easy example is models. Models are "if-then" constructs, not predictions from psychics. When the "if" changes, the "when" changes. When a model doesn't give accurate results, the correct conclusion is NOT "the people doing the models are idiots." The correct conclusion is models aren't designed to predict the future, but construct "what if" scenarios. Currently, a lot of people don't seem to understand that. Maybe they will when this is all over.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...