I work at the Centre for Effective Altruism as a contact person for the EA community. I read a lot of LessWrong around 2011 but am not up to date on whatever is happening now.
juliawise
Karma: 4,151
Notes from “Don’t Shoot the Dog”
I was coming to say something similar [edited to add: about communication skills.]
I don’t know much about this field, but one comparison that comes to mind is Ignaz Semmelweis who discovered that hand-cleaning prevented hospital deaths, but let his students write it up instead of trying to convince his colleagues more directly. The message got garbled, his colleagues thought he was a crank, and continental Europe’s understanding of germ theory was delayed by 60 years as a result.
He did write something along similar lines here: https://www.overcomingbias.com/2020/03/do-you-feel-lucky-punk.html
I think architects are correct to be skeptical of their own ability to do stuff other than right angles. MIT’s Stata Center is famously interesting, and also is full of leaks and mold because it doesn’t do the basic building thing of keeping the rain out. https://www.core77.com/posts/8026/mits-stata-center-gets-moldy-gehry-sued-over-flawed-design-8026
New Hampshire surprised me for this reason. There’s a small group of LW types but my impression is they feel pretty isolated.
Is the Massachusetts number due to the huge amount of testing MIT is doing? MIT alone is responsible for 10% of the state’s tests, and they’ve got low positive rates (7 positive tests this week out of about 10,000 tests). https://news.mit.edu/2020/covid-testing-reopening-0824
Or the number of positive tests was literally negative? I agree that seems impossible unless they somehow overcounted before and were correcting for it
Fraternities and sororities do hazing in a way that’s closest to the rituals described in the books (and the warm welcome to the group afterward).
My impression is that the passage into adulthood is quicker and more definitive in traditional societies. In my circle, you might graduate high school and leave home, which is the biggest change, then college is sort of a transitional stage where you’re fed and housed communally on someone else’s dime, then you transition to working and finding your own place to live some years later, and then maybe establishing your own family some years after that. All of which gives us more freedom—of what to study, where to live, what kind of work to do, whether and whom to marry—than we would have had in villages where that was all pretty much settled by age 20.
1. This was covered, including FGM, but seemed less consistent than the pattern for males.
2. There wasn’t much on this—a few notes on swaddling or hammock systems that included some kind of drainage. One note on how in one culture men hold babies away from their bodies to avoid getting wet, while women hold the babies close (but I’m guessing getting dirty that way?) I also don’t feel like I understand how this has worked historically, especially in colder climates where you can’t just leave them bare.
3. They talk about how mobile cultures (I think foragers) hold babies upright and encourage them to step, which does lead to earlier walking. Using a cradleboard is the opposite method, restricting the baby’s movement but it allows them to be tied to an animal, keeping them from being underfoot.
Notes on “The Anthropology of Childhood”
But other people were sharing other articles saying different things (“this is all overblown”), or just something more moderate like “we’ll have to social distance later but not yet” and other people were also taking those seriously. So I still don’t know how to answer the question of “at the time, how should we have known who to listen to?”
There are so many books on this topic that I didn’t try to catalogue them. But thanks for the recommendation!
> It is probably too late though.
That might be technically true but I think it’s misleading—I’m not clear on how common it was in China for one member of a household to get sick and others to stay well, but from anecdotal reports in the US I think it’s fairly common for one person to get it and not spread it to e.g. their spouse and children.
So I’d think if one member of a household has symptoms, it’s well worth quarantining within the household instead of assuming it’s not worth trying to limit spread.
The CDC recommends drying hands, because wet hands spread and receive microbes more easily. (Although that’s microbes generally and they’re not sure about disease-causing germs in particular). https://www.cdc.gov/handwashing/show-me-the-science-handwashing.html
So I’d think that applying lotion and then, say, opening the bathroom door with lotiony hands will re-contaminate your hands. Doing it just before sitting at your desk for a while or going to bed might be a better time, so your hands can dry when you’re not going to be walking around touching stuff.
Their advice for healthcare settings is to prefer hand sanitizer, because it’s better at killing germs, it doesn’t dry your skin as much, and you’re more likely to actually use it. https://www.cdc.gov/handhygiene/science/index.html
Their advice for community settings is to prefer soap and water, as far as I can tell because you’re more likely to have stuff on your hands (grease, dirt), and because kids might drink it. https://www.cdc.gov/handwashing/show-me-the-science-hand-sanitizer.html
This coronavirus-specific page seems to treat them interchangeably. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/guidance-prevent-spread.html
Related: CDC recommends washing with warm or cool water as opposed to hot, because hot water doesn’t help more and is more likely to bother your skin. https://www.cdc.gov/handwashing/show-me-the-science-handwashing.html
Edit: Sounds like this isn’t very useful because you’ll be able tell if you’re having trouble breathing? See comment below.
Advice: Get a pulse oximeter to be able to triage at home.
Reasoning: If you’re mildly sick, you probably don’t want to go to a medical office (both because you’ll be clogging up an overcrowded system, and because you’ll be around people who are even sicker). But you need to know when you’re sick enough to need medical care.
One way medical professionals triage is by vital signs. Most of them are obvious either to you or to other people (shortness of breath, paleness, dizziness, turning blue) but oxygen saturation (how well-oxygenated your blood is) is not. If you think you might have pneumonia (one of the common effects of coronavirus), low oxygen saturation is one of the things that would indicate that, and lower numbers should move you toward getting medical care. 95% and above is normal (at sea level) and lower numbers mean it’s likely your lungs aren’t working properly (with outcomes being worse the lower the number is).
The device is cheap and easy to use.
Note that you might still be very sick and need medical care even if your oxygen level is fine, so this is a way to rule in being sick enough to need medical care but doesn’t rule it out.
Guide to using and what levels are normal
More detailed instructions for troubleshooting
Article on lower oxygen saturation meaning worse outcomes for pneumonia
(I’m not a medical professional and would appreciate it if someone who is would double-check the logic here, or some risk I’m not thinking of in terms of people reading it wrong and coming to wrong conclusions)
- Coronavirus: Justified Practical Advice Thread by (Feb 28, 2020, 6:43 AM; 218 points)
- Coronavirus: Justified Practical Advice Thread by (Feb 28, 2020, 6:43 AM; 218 points)
- Coronavirus Justified Practical Advice Summary by (Mar 15, 2020, 10:25 PM; 87 points)
- What should we do once infected with COVID-19? by (Mar 18, 2020, 4:50 AM; 62 points)
- 's comment on Pulse Oximetry & the Oxygen–Haemoglobin Dissociation Curve by (Mar 23, 2020, 6:29 AM; 1 point)
Resource on alcohol problems
I never have a productive six-hour unbroken stretch of work, but my partner will occasionally have 6-hour bursts of very productive coding where he stays in the zone and doesn’t notice time passing. He basically looks up and realizes it’s night and everyone else had dinner hours ago. But the rest of the time he works normal hours with a more standard-to-loose level of concentration.
[speaking for myself, not for any organization]
If this is an allegory against appeals to consequences generally, well and good.
If there’s some actual question about whether wrong cost effectiveness numbers are being promoted, could people please talk about those numbers specifically so we can all have a try at working out if that’s really going on? E.g. this post made a similar claim to what’s implied in this allegory, but it was helpful that it used concrete examples so people could work out whether they agreed (and, in that case, identify factual errors).
oh right, about the public speaking / communication type skills.