Source? I looked quickly, and all I found was people saying that heating in general has an effect on protein (but we’re going to be heating this cheese a lot whether in the microwave or the conventional oven)
jefftk
Karma: 10,075
5x5 Go Board
Grandpa Has Different Rules
Would this have advantages over https://www.jefftk.com/news/kids ?
Speed Pasta Bake
Teaching Street Crossing
Boston on the other hand looks like it’s still headed upwards
It only looks that way because the graph is all-time, and so you can barely see what’s happening. Here’s the most recent data:
It looks like the southern half of the system has peaked, or at least plateaued, while the northern half is getting close.
Omicron in Biobot
The “us” I intended above was society generally, not LW folks. If you look back at the original “shut down everything now” articles they were all about deaths:
https://web.archive.org/web/20200310035017/https://www.flattenthecurve.com/
https://tomaspueyo.medium.com/coronavirus-act-today-or-people-will-die-f4d3d9cd99ca
https://medium.com/@joschabach/flattening-the-curve-is-a-deadly-delusion-eea324fe9727
Specifically on Lesswrong, most pre-lockdown discussion was about deaths (ex https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/RukXjEvMfqDKRJaup/what-will-be-the-big-picture-implications-of-the-coronavirus) with the notable exception of Jim’s https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/h4GFHbhxE2pfiadhi/will-covid-19-survivors-suffer-lasting-disability-at-a-high
What, specifically, do you think changed to make the situation more similar to typical flu season?
A very large portion of the population now has exposure to covid, either directly or via vaccination. It’s not enough to keep people from getting it (or variants) again, but it is strongly protective against death. The high death rate of covid in an immunonaive population was what got us to take it seriously and lock down in the first place.
How much of that change is rooted in factors that affect society at large, versus being rooted in your own house’s success at reducing your risks for particularly severe outcomes (less immunocompromised; newborn is now older), versus being rooted in your increasing pessimism about our ability to manage tradeoffs in a nuanced way as a society?
My comment at the end of my post about flu season maybe didn’t belong in a post under this title; I was thinking there much more about how it made sense for people in general to behave than our household in particular. So almost all the first one, via people’s immune systems.
Are you intending a distinction between “exposed to Omicron“ and “getting Omicron”? (looking at “if it were critical that I or a housemate didn’t get Omicron” vis-a-vis your prediction that “pretty much everyone who doesn’t take intense and careful effort to avoid it will be exposed to Omicron at some point in the next ~month”)
My model here is something like, everyone who does not take serious precautions is very likely to be exposed enough to Omicron that they will get it if that is something their immune system will let happen right now?
Careful With Trailing Averages
Personal Response to Omicron
The tweet you are linking seems to be pointing out that deflating by wages and deflating by prices are different things, but I don’t see it giving an opinion? Perhaps this is me not really understanding Twitter?
I think it’s pretty unlikely that this is what the person who started all of this off was getting at? They shared an update saying it was just sloppy research: https://mobile.twitter.com/drchristhompson/status/1472039474901049346 And I haven’t seen anyone sharing it adding commentary along these lines.
I want to specifically highlight “A bunch of people we respected and worked with had decided the world was going to end, very soon, uncomfortably soon, and they were making it extremely difficult for us to check their work.” I noticed this second-hand at the time, but didn’t see any paths toward making things better. I think it had a really harmful effects on the community, and is worth thinking a lot about before something similar happens again.
This is a good example of a comment that is not a contribution to the discussion, but which lots of people here agree with, illustrating the power and flexibility of the two-axis voting system. Except, if you meant it as such, it’s a valuable contribution to the discussion, and shouldn’t be downvoted. But if it weren’t downvoted it wouldn’t properly show off the voting system, and would no longer be valuable. You’ve tied us in knots!
Why don’t you think “what can you buy with your wages” is what the original poster and re-sharers were thinking about? Alternatively, what sort of metric do you think they would have preferred?
In theory, you should be able to get the same answer both ways, because they represent the same concept. In practice, I agree that you would get different answers because of the kinds of issues you’re bringing up around what you choose to include in the basket and how you adjust for quality/substitution
When we attempt to convert between 1843 GBP and modern USD, the overall process is essentially: convert from 1843 GBP to some quantity of goods and services, then figure out how much that quantity of goods and services would cost in modern USD.
Using GBP inflation tables gets us from 1843 GBP to modern GBP, and then international currency conversion does almost this. The problem is that we are missing a factor of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity but for 2021 GBP:USD it’s 1.05x and so doesn’t matter very much.
If you wanted to convert in the opposite order, you would need PPP for 1843, which sounds a lot harder to come by?
Yes, I think it varies a lot between people. Comparing me and my two siblings, one has a very strong sweet tooth and always wants to eat lots of candy, one sets rules for themself about how much is okay and doesn’t have that much, and the third isn’t that interested.