|
I figured you'd sea it that way.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
No, but an upside down cake might work. the whole thing sounds fishy to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I subscribe to a number of online medical sites (MD-oriented). One pointed out a rather interesting concept that is all-too-relevant in today's world:
". . . no one demands randomized clinical trials of parachutes."
Make of it what you will (I find it profound in its simplicity) - it's actually something to consider in long-term decision making and not just in today's obvious context.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos, GHB wrote: parachutes
It's very easy to tell if a parachute is to blame for someone falling to the earth and dying, knowing if a drug killed someone is much more difficult and there is a number of deaths that is considered allowable before it becomes a problem.
Apples and oranges.
|
|
|
|
|
You fail to abstract the concept (i.e., a long term utilization).
As for "is the parachute to blame" idea - I think that's more an apples and oranges than what I posted.
The point is to use good judgement as to weighing risks vs. the absolute verifiability of "Proof of Concept". Probably because of my rather heavy science background, but results are almost invariably given with error-bars. That is a measure of certainty, and obviously, uncertainty, in how likely one is able to duplicate the results (what, in fact, equates to duplication of a claim).
Unfortunately turning directly to the vaccine concept: they best of them were given ca. 95% effectiveness in preventing the disease. That means 5% will, in fact, get the disease: breakthrough infections. The media hype of these breakthroughs is ridiculous in that it was already part of the description . . . a given. Even those in the 5% group apparently benifit greatly from the extreme reduction in the seriousness of the illness.
But the point of real interest - hundreds of millions of vaccinations given with virtually no ill effects - certainly in light of the alternative situation that existed - should give one cause to consider the true cost/benefit ratio: risk of vaccination vs. risk of none.
In my personal point of view, we've actually had a huge Phase III trial - the clearly observable outcomes of those who have and those who have not been vaccinated. You can choose to believe the results or not. Human nature, unfortunately, tends to "herd" people towards believing primarily what they want to hear.*
* And that can be applied to me and my above reply, can it not?
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos, GHB wrote: risk of vaccination vs. risk of none.
Hard to know for sure. There was just an article a couple of weeks ago that 100% of people in someplace in the UK that had recently gotten COVID were vaccinated. I don't remember the details.
|
|
|
|
|
SeeSharp2 wrote: There was just an article a couple of weeks ago that 100%
One of our current era's greatest problems - "you read it somewhere" -
That could be very interesting, or made up, or true-ish, leaving out important facts that can cast an entirely different light on the report. Just the way things have become.
But that aside, I can point out that in the US (Mainly Pizer, then Moderna and J&J), the vast majority of cases in the what I'd call "anti-vax" states are the unvaccinated and, when you move on to hospitalization, it's all but exclusively the unvaccinated.
The real point (to me) has always been not 100% protection from catching it but essentially 100% protection from getting very sick from it. That's where I put my money.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
W∴ Balboos, GHB wrote: - "you read it somewhere"
 Too true. But that's essentially where all of our "knowledge" comes from.
|
|
|
|
|
In the U.S. almost 100% ofthe people dying, or severly affected by Covid, including the 5 variant, are those not vaccinated. ABC Nightly News.
Also 99% of those severly affected, to a person, said they wished they'd been vaccinated.
I don't know what's going on in the UK, but, short of a bad batch of the vacine, or placebo innoculations, I have trouble believing that.
|
|
|
|
|
That's hardly surprising, in fact it's inevitable. In the extreme case, 100% of the population will be vaccinated, and in some localities, it's already close to that now. So of those who fall into that "5%" (for whom vaccination does not prevent covid), 100% of them will have been vaccinated. But as a result of vaccination, the number of people who got Covid is 1/20th what it would have been without.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Plus, the use of "placebo parachutes" is going to be ... um ... unpopular 
"I have no idea what I did, but I'm taking full credit for it." - ThisOldTony
"Common sense is so rare these days, it should be classified as a super power" - Random T-shirt
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
Liked the way you dropped that one in!
Repo Man
|
|
|
|
|
Exactly. No one way of testing (or developing or documenting) "things" is appropriate for all types of things.
|
|
|
|
|
You got that right! Those government goon got us!
I am going to stop using parachutes effective immediately!! 
(I think I'll be fine, I never jumped out of a perfectly working plane yet!)
|
|
|
|
|
SPCA is still protesting the use of animals in parachute trials.
I know I read that somewhere.
If I recollect it was write above the POST button.
|
|
|
|
|
I have to make a little application, read an Excel spreadsheet, create some PDF files and send some emails.
Thought I'd check out the new WinForms in .NET Core.
I thought Microsoft released a stable version, but constant crashes, weird behavior and simply unsupported basic functionality determined that was a lie... 
Visual Studio just crashed so hard I had kill all instances in the task manager because the default "the application crashed you may close it" dialog crashed as well, and VS crashed because it hit a breakpoint... 
Third crash to desktop in about two hours time, not counting the times I had to restart to fix some off behavior 
|
|
|
|
|
Do you have to insult us?!
"The only place where Success comes before Work is in the dictionary." Vidal Sassoon, 1928 - 2012
|
|
|
|
|
perhaps some clue as to what is really happening during this crash, can be found in your OS application event logs. I am sure it is not entirely Microsoft Visual Studio's fault.
|
|
|
|
|
Nope. For someone (as in moi) that was admittedly anti-web a few years ago, I pretty much write everything as a web app nowadays, even small utilities. Crazy.
Sander Rossel wrote: Thought I'd check out the new WinForms in .NET Core.
You're brave 
|
|
|
|
|
This is a serious question. If you make small utilities as web apps, doesn't that mean you have to have access to a web server? I do a lot of WinForms tools, and it seems that getting a web service installed on a customer's server is a hurdle I've never tried to jump for small things. I may be missing something important though.
|
|
|
|
|
You're right, although once you have access to a web server and deploy automatically using CI/CD, adding an extra service is not so difficult anymore.
If it's a small utility for your own purposes, I guess you could run it directly from Visual Studio (which is what I do with some stuff).
|
|
|
|
|
Rich Shealer wrote: If you make small utilities as web apps, doesn't that mean you have to have access to a web server?
Sorry for the delayed response.
Our company manages our own servers (well, AWS hosted) for the product line, including development servers, etc., so I primarily install these utilities on the development server domain which we have access to internally or through a VPN. Also I probably should have clarified that these are utilities we use in-house for monitoring and managing rather than utilities we expose to our customers. If it's a utility that needs to be exposed to our customer, it gets folded into the customer-facing product somewhere under configuration / maintenance.
And if it's a really one-off thing that simply makes my life easier, I just host it locally under IIS and put the code in a company repo somewhere so that others have access to it if they want.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
