Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Pogeu Mahone who wrote (160236)	7/16/2020 11:12:14 PM
From: arun gera	1 Recommendation Recommended By Mannie Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 220277

Does open air matter somewhat? -Arun

To: Pogeu Mahone who wrote (160236)	7/16/2020 11:54:05 PM
From: Joseph Silent	6 Recommendations Recommended By arun gera bull_dozer gg cox ggersh Mannie and 1 more member Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 220277

Contagions don't care about what people think, about suburban moms, about governors or even about fancy words like "weaponising", There is much that people do not know. We know people are dying. We know that we do not understand long-term consequences. By now, we should know that leaders cannot be chosen based on reality-show training. We should know that leaders should be honest, smart and have at least a modicum of wisdom. That is putting it mildly. Points move about randomly in 2-D or 3-D. When two or more points come within a certain distance of one another, there are conditional probabilities (point-dependent, time-dependent, location-dependent, and possibly dependent on a host of other unknown things) that one or more points affect (infect) one or more other points, given point-dependent unconditional probabilities of point-infection. Given infection, the probability of death (immediately or via long-term consequences) is complicated and unknown. We do not know any of these probabilities. We make up numbers from data. That means we do not understand the parameters of the process. We always end up using averages (even for probabilities), and averages are always misleading. Words, arguments, commentary are not going to solve anything. Data may help with models and assessments but cannot be used to prove anything, though people frequently treat data as proof. Models work until they do not work, because assumptions were bad or the data changed or the data was wrong or all of it. If your house is on fire, it's probably not the best time to wonder about conspiracies hell bent on driving up your insurance, organizing a revolt against being forced to take time away from work, and being suspicious of those triggering a boom in lumber. You can do these things if you still have the energy later. But first put out the fire. First things first. Our house is on fire.