Better, IMO: (1) those who believe in science would panic less. (2) And for those who don't, they would not be impacted since they are YOLO. (3) And for science + non-science interactions, that would be less stressful since we are all pretty much used to putting up with each other in this way.
Citation needed, but of course you can’t provide those numbers. Did the republicans also have higher birth rates, and managed to grow a new batch in time to win the 2024 election?
In this cohort study evaluating 538 159 deaths in individuals aged 25 years and older in Florida and Ohio between March 2020 and December 2021, excess mortality was significantly higher for Republican voters than Democratic voters after COVID-19 vaccines were available to all adults, but not before. These differences were concentrated in counties with lower vaccination rates, and primarily noted in voters residing in Ohio.
Perhaps related is that the voting age population (vap) only increased ~30% of what would be predicted by the curve fit up to that point. Could be that some people died out of the vap early.
Compounded with that, the voting eligible population (vep) increased exactly as predicted. Which means for each early demose of someone in the vap, someone else already in the vap became eligible when they hadn't been previously. Perhaps some states changed their laws about who was eligible?
This statement is not true, the 2020 election had both a higher absolute total turnout and a higher number of absolute votes for the winning candidate.
Regardless, the cleaner way to compare election years is by % VEP or %VAP - otherwise you're effectively comparing population between the years by accident. From this perspective I disagree with GP, 2024 was still a great year for turnout... just not as good as 2020. 2024 sits 2nd in VEP and 7th VAP (out of the last 24 elections).
> more votes than anyone had ever received prior to that.
That fact falls into a whole class of "new records" which sound impressive but are usually meaningless, because it's closer to the default outcome.
In this case, the voting-age population was (yet again) going to increase, so each "new record" in votes cast becomes boringly-normal rather than unusually interesting. The same also happens with certain dollar-amount records, which are not adjusted for inflation or overall economy growth.
A similar phenomenon to https://xkcd.com/1138/ , except it has to do with trends over time rather than geographically.
While it’s true that setting a new record isn’t unusual, in the case of 2020, the turnout was actually very high even taking into account population growth.
General information I found (after a -casual- search, not rigorous):
"current public health risk is low", and (EDIT: NOT the current strain) "50% mortality rate WORLDWIDE" (/NOT), and "less than 100 Americans in 2024 known to be infected", "bird to human (not human to human yet) transmission"
> current public health risk is low", and (EDIT: NOT the current strain) "50% mortality rate WORLDWIDE" (/NOT)
I’ve not only found online articles that emphasize one focus over the other (low current rate of serious illness in US vs high long-window mortality rate worldwide), I’ve found articles that say both things a few paragraphs apart and don’t give the reader any lifeline for resolving the tension (strains/substrains, access to care, effective interventions, etc).
It’s a reasonable mistake, but when reasonable people see it I hope we’re reaching out to the publishers and asking them to clarify. Better comms improve trust and we’re still suffering from poor if reasonable comms in early 2020.
It probably never did. Owing to the very limited testing then and even now, we have certainly missed a lot of cases.
That said, when they do end up in the hospital, they usually tend to be seriously ill. But that tells us little about the frequency of such high acuity cases. Still, severe influenza A subtypes are no joke.
One of the other things is the very high fatality rate from H5N1 generally has come, previous to this current strain, from primary cases with very intensive exposure to the avian-adapted strain, which is much more fond of receptors in the lower respiratory tract.
Those types of cases for many infectious diseases (i.e. MERS) are much more lethal than subsequent human-to-human infections.
The word intent is oftentimes used in The judicial system to measure culpability and punishment:
whether somebody accidentally stabbed a person 90 times or intentionally stabbed the person 90 times, for instance, is captured via the concept of intent.
I speculate that the ads were created long before Apple AI was delayed to the following year, in 2023. And culture hadn't realized how big a negative side such a cool tech has, then. Generously.
I'm thinking they're aiming to capitalize on mixed feelings people have about AI. These ads let the viewers have their social objects to diss AI - "haha, AI is for the losers like in that Apple ad", while at the same time making them say, in the privacy of their thoughts, "but I am not a loser and I could use such functions too!".
You're not telling the consumer he'll be a joke. You're telling them that even if they were humorously villainous, they'd get away with it and everyone would be okay with it, since it worked out so well.
Sci-fi is useful that way, extending a platform of base familiarity upon which the readers may then more quickly comprehend new advances and novel events. Love the stuff
Wow that's rude. Who is you, who are liberals, and outbursts suggests that the words that I as a liberal speak are dismissible as irrational, when they are not.
Please don't do that.
When Trump literally sexually abuses women, is convicted of it, repeatedly disparages the abused woman in public, And then I talk about it here on hacker News, how That an outburst?
Please, the truth and the facts and the logic are pretty clear. This trump guy is racist and transphobic and misogynistic based on his past behavior. Anybody who supports the guy is encouraging the system which they are now electing him to manage to be racist transphobic and misogynistic. It's pretty simple and transitive logic.
I haven't followed it all that closely but didn't he end up being charged for libel/slander? That lady was a complete batshit lunatic. Just watch her interview with Anderson Cooper; it's objectively cringeworthy.
reply