/sci/ - Science & Math

So, you don't know either?

Tell me why :(

No answers. No opinions.

I will try one more bump and maybe one last in six hours for the next shift. I don't come here often. Maybe this is played out or boring. I think there is no response because none can provide an explanation why people are herding like cattle to be tested. There is no sanity in this behavior and it is being allowed by healthcare professionals and reported by the media. It is creating a problem where there wasn't one. Why?

>>11915281
The answer seems obvious: they want to know if they have COVID19 or not. Am I missing something in the question?

>>11916897
>It is creating a problem where there wasn't one.
Which is?

>>11916913
>>11916907
An increased risk of exposure and spread. Especially, because many will stop by McDonald's on the way back. Most situations I can think of, if you have it, you have it. The wait for results can be a month, in which time, you may have gotten it. A negative result may encourage people to go out and get it. I can understand that health workers and maybe food preparation personnel should have easy access. There are worry warts gumming the mix. That person in the car there, is having contact with a man who who has been in contact with other people of unknown status, all day long. He is seeing like a thousand people a day. Why is this a thing? People wanting to know is not a sufficient reason for doing this.

I've noticed a lot of weirdness in how the numbers are being reported. If you look at any daily graph, you'll see that the numbers drop on weekends and holidays and then spike at the start of the week. It's been said that this is because most county health departments are closed on weekends and holidays so the numbers are counted when they reopen on Mondays or after the holiday. Which means cases are recorded in the data on the day they're reported rather than the day they were detected. That would be fine except if you compare data files from day to day, you can see that numbers for previous days get revised frequently. The reason to do this is if they're recording cases based on date detected rather than date reported. That would be ok but then the weekend and holiday dips should get smoothed out, especially for deaths. But that's not what happens.

>>11916970
In theory there shouldn't be cross contamination between people being tested. Protocols have been designed specifically for this situation where testing is needed without spreading the contagion. As long as they follow those protocols, things should be ok. Of course they're human so it's possible they make mistakes. It's a question of how often do they do that.
Not sure about your point of stopping at McDonald's. They could go to McDonald's even if they weren't getting tested.

>>11916999
>human so it's possible they make mistakes
Yeah, super possible. I have a health problem and need to go to the hospital regularly. You may have stronger faith in authority but, I think that it is just plain stupid. There is sections, with office, pharmacy, laboratory, physical therapy, newborns. But they locked every door except one entrance and exit that intercept each other. I don't imagine six feet does as much when you are marching in single file. I figure it is overblown anyhow but, I am high risk. I go in to get my shots and none of the workers are with mask. Just customers. The workers don't give a fuck anymore and told me it is bullcrap. Idk. I don't want a bunch of people to die, anyhow. Not as individuals. And Idk. People sitting in front of the tv tend to stay there. When something motivates them to get test, they will do other things since they are out and about.
>>11916982
This is in line with my thinking. There is something fishy about the whole deal. Are other countries doing this mass testing? Is that one reason why the USA is sucking so hard? Is this because elections are coming? It makes no sense. Are people this dumb?

>>11917097
>Are other countries doing this mass testing?
The USA is only 23rd in per capita testing, though to be fair, Russia and the UK are the only other countries with populations in excess of 10 million that are testing more. That said, when Wuhan appeared to be headed for another outbreak, China quickly tested 10 million people. Wuhan only has a population of 13 million. They weren't going to let another outbreak go undetected. It's so far widespread in the USA now that it's impossible to catch up.

>>11917153
Oh, so are you saying that a benefit of testing is to quarantine people? Is that effective when the results take a month? Do other countries conduct mass testing in football stadiums or they just better at getting people though the system? China seems like a difficult comparison.

>>11917220
I don't really know what the system for testing is in other countries. S. Korea had drive-up testing sites by February. Are results really taking a month? Last I'd heard, the wait may be up to a week.

>>11917257
Yeah. I'm exaggerating. SOME of them are taking 28 days, according to the news. Depends on state and where you go. It's faster if you pay yourself. Still, it's voluntary, so, that kinda doesn't fit with quarantine. I can't wrap my mind around it and it doesn't seem this thread will help. It is hard to explain things that make no sense.

>>11916982
>>11917097
People don't go to the hospital on weekends and holidays.

Or it's a massive conspiracy that can't bother itself to keep a curve as smooth as your brains.

>>11917409
This is good advice that I have not considered. I find days that start with "T" are less crowded, anyway.

>>11917277
It doesn't make sense because there is no centralized mandate. If the government would step up and actually organize mass testing and quarantine maybe that would work but at this point it's up to states and counties to decide their own methods and you even see governors and the president undermining counties when they try to actually solve the problem.
In America we love freedom more than anything unfortunately that includes the freedom to die in a fucking gutter.

>>11917474
This is true but, just like going into war without an objective, there's no end game or rule book. Maybe this is more of a dry run staged event, than it is really serious. Pretty sure America would topple its own government if citizens started getting pushed around. I could see if it was like, "Here is the problem. Here is the solution. This is what we need to do, to make it happen."

>>11917409
People still die on the weekend or are you claiming dead bodies are left to rot where they fell and are only taken in on Monday?

>>11917700
We were talking about hospitalizations but also yes. Many people are not noticed to have died until after they fail to appear at work.

>>11917409
Oh, maybe I read this wrong. I think that a lot of people do wait to go to the hospital on weekends. Saturday mornings is the most busy time for lab test, at my hospital.

>>11915281
>Why the fuck are people doing this
Many people are required too, e.g. paramedics, firefighters, etc. have to have regular tests.
Also there are a lot of people who's job requires them to be around others.

The downsides are also near zero, except for like 30 minutes of your time...

>>11916897
>It is creating a problem where there wasn't one.
It does not create a problem. And if you break your leg do you want to be treated by a paramedic with corona?

>>11916970
>An increased risk of exposure and spread.
Extremely minimal compared to just going shopping.

>The wait for results can be a month
LOL. My test result was about 24 hours.

>That person in the car there, is having contact with a man who who has been in contact with other people of unknown status
The "contact" is basically none. Going into a super market is FAR more risky then getting tested.

>People wanting to know is not a sufficient reason for doing this.
A lot of people work around other people and thus it is a pretty good idea to get tested.

>>11917277
>that kinda doesn't fit with quarantine
You don't even leave your car.

>I can't wrap my mind around it
It is extremely simple.

>>11918664
What a chump.

>>11918664
>increase exposure to decrease risk.
How to logic.

>>11917097
>Is this because elections are coming?
yes, anon, the whole world revolves around your precious trump and your retarded 2 party politics

>>11917726
>We were talking about hospitalizations
No, we were talking about both. Don't try to retroactively limit the discussion to metrics that don't conflict with your agenda.
>Many people are not noticed to have died until after they fail to appear at work.
What is many? 1%? 99%? It's an important difference if you're going to try to say this happens enough to cause the large valleys and peaks seen in the graphs.

>>11919368
Sadly it pretty much does.

>>11919389
you are delusional and should take a break from 4chan and /pol/, where some hobo shitting himself in a brazilian favela is obviously a cia psyop to mess with 'the elections'

>>11917819
Sundays are the days that see the decline. I generalized to weekends cause I'm lazy.

>>11919368
Ha! That wasn't even me but yes. The only one who had an explanation was this >>11918664
Super retard. I even said that I was exaggerating. Not like this thread is too big to read.
>>11919418
It's okay bro. We can catch the main point of not showing up during rush hour.

First for fuck premeds!

>>11919635
We aren't all so deep. Explain?

Forgot to mention that my IQ is 159. Fight me!

>>11919355
No. I said doing the test is far less risky then going to the super market, which it is...

>>11917153
>China quickly tested 10 million people. Wuhan only has a population of 13 million
I’m as American as school shootings, but damn sometimes you just gotta appreciate the power of communism.

>>11916970
Compared to what not knowing you have COVID and just going on with your life shopping meeting people till you get symptoms? Is it better they get tested At a hospital in person walking around and when they drive back home still go to McDonald’s? No you are retarded this thread is retarded.

>>11921603
>the power of communism
Communism refers to the workers owning the means of production. In China the workers do not own the means of production, it operates under a free market with varying degrees of state control.
Might as well call Germany or France communist countries.

China is able to be efficient because they have a very uniform and obedient population and a strong government.
They are able to push things onto their population which the US just can not.

>>11921752
lmao, they are only part of the free market so long as they play by the very strict and explicit rules the CCP forces them to, or else they become wholly owned by the government. Don't criticize Xi or you'll be thrown into a gulag and your business will be forfeit.

>>11921785
>they are only part of the free market so long as they play by the very strict and explicit rules the CCP forces them to
That really depends on the area, but I said the exact same thing.
But that has nothing to do with communism, as, again Communism means "working control over the means of production", this clearly is anything but the case.
You can not call a state where domestic and foreign companies operate under a limited free market communist, that is just absurd.

>Don't criticize Xi or you'll be thrown into a gulag and your business will be forfeit.
This is just authoritarianism, which might coincide with the attempt to implement communism, but by no means is the characteristic by which you would define a communist state.

>>11921805
>working
*worker

>>11921752
> Might as well call Germany or France communist countries.
>China is able to be efficient because they have a very uniform and obedient population and a strong government.
You are actually delusional. You really think Germany or France are remotely comparable to China? China effectively owns every single business that operates within their country, it is only a matter deciding to take over. Fortunately for some of their smarter citizens, their government realized a free market solution is much more efficient than trying to control millions of businesses in everyday dealings. They can and do,however, step in whenever they feel like it. Their only elections are at best an election for a minor power, as their primary controlling power can never be removed. Their citizens also have no guarantees to rights every single other major free state considers basic. This wasn’t the deeds of obedient citizens. China says we’re testing, you’re getting tested. It says those who are positive need to quarantine, then you’re getting your doors and windows boarded up regardless. As for the “not true communism” argument, it always turns out this way. Communism is inseparable from totalitarianism in its practical application. A billion people can’t magically hive mind to make decisions. The idea that this was the result of nearly total synchronized national altruism and not a tyrannical government is the most asinine thing I’ve heard in a while.

>>11921829
>You really think Germany or France are remotely comparable to China?
In "how communist" they are, yes.

>China effectively owns every single business that operates within their country,
Not worker control over the means of production.

> their government realized a free market solution is much more efficient
Not worker control over the means of production.

>Their only elections are at best an election for a minor power, as their primary controlling power can never be removed.
Not worker control over the means of production.

> Their citizens also have no guarantees to rights every single other major free state considers basic.
Not worker control over the means of production.

>China says we’re testing, you’re getting tested.
Not worker control over the means of production.

>t says those who are positive need to quarantine, then you’re getting your doors and windows boarded up regardless.
Not worker control over the means of production.

>As for the “not true communism” argument, it always turns out this way.
So what?
It still is NOT A COMMUNIST COUNTRY. As the workers do not own the means of production.

>Communism is inseparable from totalitarianism in its practical application.
So what?

>The idea that this was the result of nearly total synchronized national altruism and not a tyrannical government is the most asinine thing I’ve heard in a while.
Okay, but why do you just make up random ideas.
Your entire tirade is literally just repeating what I said.

>>11921842
> Not worker control over the means of production.
> Not worker control over the means of production.
> Not worker control over the means of production.
Muh not true communism
It is the result of the implementation of communist ideals. The fact that this always devolves into a into a totalitarian oppressive regime doesn’t change that.
>So what?
>It still is NOT A COMMUNIST COUNTRY
It was started as such, behaved as such, and still declares itself as such. Mao was as much a communist as anybody ever was. Just cause you don’t like the inevitable result doesn’t change any of that. What point are you even trying to make here? A semantic one? Are you just being an autist over strict definitions? Or are you trying to make a defense of its practical application? Because aside from you, no one cares about the first. And in the second, it’s a perfectly valid criticism. It’s as ridiculous as saying no Christian has ever murdered someone because a true Christian wouldn’t do that.
> In "how communist" they are, yes.
Only using your retarded notion that none of these are at all communist. This IS communism at the state level, or really anytime more than 20 people are involved.
> but why do you just make up random ideas.
>Your entire tirade is literally just repeating what I said.
Actually most of it was either directly pointing out how utterly ridiculous your attribution of mass testing to good will and cooperation between the government and its citizens was or presenting evidence supporting that. Sorry that triggered you and your boner for communism, but it doesn’t stop being true just cause you don’t like the critique.

>>11921894
>It is the result of the implementation of communist ideals.
Yes, I said that already, but it really changes nothing.

>It was started as such, behaved as such, and still declares itself as such.
By that sentence I assume you agree with me that it isn't anymore...

> Mao was as much a communist as anybody ever was.
Of course, that is pretty much undeniable.

>What point are you even trying to make here?
China is not a communist country and implying that it is, is the greatest argument for communism in existence.
As, despite it flaws, it is an economically successful country, unlike any regime that ever tried to implement "worker control of the means of production".

Just imagine what *if* China was a communist country, then that would mean you could have a successful economy and that the only thing stopping successful Communism is a lack of democracy.
If you actually talk to communist they *love* to claim China as a successful example of communism.

>It’s as ridiculous as saying no Christian has ever murdered someone because a true Christian wouldn’t do that.
Well, if someone calls himself a Christian but openly worships Satan, I think it might be correct to point out that, despite his claims, he is not in any meaningful way a Christian.

>retarded notion
If the word "communism" means anything then it has to mean "worker control over the means of production".

>This IS communism at the state level
No. The workers do not control the means of production.

>good will and cooperation between the government
I never said anything about good will. And OBVIOUSLY there was cooperation, wiling one or unwillig one, but cooperation nonetheless.

>your boner for communism
I have anything but a boner for communism and I don't know how you get the idea.
I also have to say that I am very much not a communist and am very much against communism or its direct predecessor, the french revolution (together with its imitations, like the German or American revolutions).

>>11916999
>Of course they're human
I love how that statement implies machines do not fail.

>>11919368
>>11919398
I'm not even a burger. But you don't seem to understand the importance of the US elections. It's only the seat of the biggest world-wide economic and military empire.

Of course the world revolves around the US elections dumbass.

>>11921915
>Yes, I said that already, but it really changes nothing
> By that sentence I assume you agree with me that it isn't anymore
Again, only in the semantic sense. When in any practical application it has just reached another phase of its natural evolution, it’s perfectly valid to call it communism, specially when everyone else including themselves does. It’s just totalitarian communism.
> China is not a communist country and implying that it is, is the greatest argument for communism in existence.
How is the state gaining economic empowerment through its billion peasants and destruction of anyone else with even a semblance of power anywhere close to a good argument for its success as a communist state? Yes, you can amass plenty of wealth when you have a billion people to exploit, it would still be wrong and there’s be nothing inconsistent about saying communism is wrong, China is communist, and China is one of the biggest economies in the world.
> the word "communism" means anything then it has to mean
If none of that has ever or probably could ever exist at the state level, then what meaning would “communist state” have. You could argue it shouldn’t be used at all, but I think even you would agree that if it had to have a meaningful practical definition, then a state that naturally progressed based on communist ideals is the best one.
> never said anything about good will
Really? Backpedaling this hard now? It was clearly meant to be a positive representation of what was really going on? A very uniform and obedient population? It has one of the most massive wealth disparities in the world and it had nothing to do with being obedient. These people weren’t obediently starving/wasting away locked in a boarded up house.

>>11921915
> And OBVIOUSLY there was cooperation, wiling one or unwillig one, but cooperation nonetheless.
You know for someone being an autist about dictionary definitions, you sure fucked up here. The root word is “co-operate”, that alone should have lit up the sky in alarms. But let’s try google
>the process of working together towards the save end
>assistance, specially by ready compliance with requests
At least most people call China communist, including themselves. Hardly anyone would call having all your exits blocked “cooperation”.

because the media is convincing a bunch of idiots that this is the black death when it reality it's just another flu and if you weren't at risk of dying from the old flu then you're not at risk from this one either

>>11922023
>if you weren't at risk of dying from the old flu then you're not at risk from this one either
That’s completely false. Children are effectively immune from COVID meanwhile it’s they make a a huge chunk of the flu’s victims. The risk factors for otherwise low risk people for COVID have to do specifically with cardiovascular and respiratory issues, while that of the flu are due to general weakness.

>>11922016
>it’s perfectly valid to call it communism
Please define the word "communism", my definition is "worker controlled means of production".

>How is the state gaining economic empowerment through its billion peasants and destruction of anyone else with even a semblance of power anywhere close to a good argument for its success as a communist state?
Because it is an *economically successful country*. The argument by communists is that China+democracy will result in fully working communism with a benevolent government.

>China is communist, and China is one of the biggest economies in the world.
Which means communism is a successful economic theory which uplifted nearly a billion people from being peasants working fields into *somewhat* reasonable living standards.

>then what meaning would “communist state” have.
A state under which the workers control the means of production.

>then a state that naturally progressed based on communist ideals is the best one.
Absolutely not.

>Really?
Yes, quote me where I did otherwise.

>A very uniform and obedient population?
I think that is a very neutral representation. Do you disagree with it?
Are there large cultural gaps in China? Do people generally protest against government measures they do not like?

>It has one of the most massive wealth disparities in the world
Okay, and? Massive wealth gaps does not imply that there are great cultural gaps.

>it had nothing to do with being obedient.
Complying with the government has nothing to do with being obedient?

>>11922018
>the process of working together towards the save end
Did the Chinese NOT work together with the government towards the end of corona testing?

Because it seems ABSOLUTELY clear that they did.

>>11922023
>if a disease doesn't kill you it doesn't really matter, but if it does kill you who cares anyway lol
Why are there so many brainlets here?

>>11922016
>It has one of the most massive wealth disparities in the world
Hmm, this seems very false:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gini_coefficient

At least it doesn't seem significantly worse then the US.

>>11922060
>communism
The implementation of communist ideals. Please define “state communism” in a relevant sense.
>will result in fully working communism with a benevolent government.
And again, how does profiting from exploiting a billion people push you towards that goal? The argument against communism was never that a few people can’t get ridiculously rich off of it, it was that it’s an shitty system that inevitably turns into a totalitarian oppressive regime. Who gives a fuck if those at the top are rich?
> which uplifted nearly a billion people from being peasants working fields into *somewhat* reasonable living standards.
Is that why everything is still made there? For its fantastic working conditions And solid middle class earning a part time US salary even in its big cities with the best conditions? Sure, it’s slightly better than the outspoken imperialism it replaced, after allowing some notion of free trade.
> A state under which the workers control the means of production
What if that never exists at a state level? Do you want to autistically on to a useless notion of pure communism? Or would you leave some room for practicality. It really doesn’t matter what you’d do either way, because the world decided on the latter already and that’s how language works.
> Do you disagree with it?
I already twice explained very clearly why I do. Like I said, obedience had nothing to do with it. They were going to do what the government decided they should do and there was fuck all they could do about it. There wasn’t even a chance to be obedient but they sure didn’t look like they were enjoying being forced into their homes and boarded up.
>Massive wealth gaps does not imply that there are great cultural gaps
It does when you consider why. The only ones with an even remotely live-able wage by US standards are in cities, which are massively different than its agricultural population, which are themselves regionally divided.

>>11922060
> Complying with the government has nothing to do with being obedient?
Are you intentionally acting retarded or did you really not understand a very simple point? My point was it wasn’t complying, they weren’t being asked.
> Because it seems ABSOLUTELY clear that they did.
Wow backpedaling really really hard here. What happened to cooperation being possible without both sides? Either way, I never claimed the Chinese were total COVID deniers completely incapable of willingly going to get a nose swab, just that China was always going to get the result it wanted regardless of what its people thought of it.

>>11922135
>Please define “state communism” in a relevant sense.
A state under which the workers control the means of production

>What if that never exists at a state level?
Then "state communism" never existed.

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

>And again, how does profiting from exploiting a billion people push you towards that goal?
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.POV.GINI?end=2016&locations=US-CN&start=1974
It seems to me that the communists are successfully reducing income inequality, while capitalism results in, at the very least, consistently high income inequality.
Please not, that I am being sarcastic.

>just that China was always going to get the result it wanted regardless of what its people thought of it.
Which is EXACTLY what I said, I don't get why you are so upset about this.

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

>>11922153
>A state under which the workers control the means of production
I don’t think you understand the word relevant any more than you understood the word cooperation
> PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else
Then you should have, when I asked way back here >>11921894, just said that you were just an autist sperging out our over the literal definition of the word. Sure, let’s ignore the real world effects of implementing those ideas, the fact that everyone else calls the resulting government communist, and the consequences of that government on its people. No you’re right, the only thing that matters here and that we should care about is that everyone else is misusing the word communism (also let’s forget about the fact that you kept trying to argue other points and only in the end resorted to supposedly not caring about anything else). Congratulations, you’re actually retarded.
> It seems to me that the communists are successfully reducing income inequality
Again, it did implement some form of free trade because controlling everything is not feasible. The vast majority of its people are still not well off by any first world standards. Again, even its middle class is comparable to a part time job over here (700 USD range) while going to the countrie’s more agricultural regions will get you an only slightly higher average but instead for a yearly salary. So yes, a proportional measure of wealth disparity might be similar for both countries, but the differences between a guy earning 80k and a guy earning 8m is much smaller than someone earning 10k and someone earning 100 as far as an ethical problem.

>>11922232
>Then you should have, when I asked way back here >>11921894
I did like 10 times, even before that. "Worker control over the means of production."

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

Your usage of the word "communism" has NO MEANING, I don't care if you want a looser definition, BUT TELL ME WHAT IT WOULD BE!

>>11922246
>did like 10 times, even before that. "Worker control over the means of production.
Did you even read what I said? I didn’t say you should have defined it way back then, I said you should have stated way back then that you only cared about adherence strictly to some strict definition of it because, correct me if I’m wrong, I made it very I had no interest in playing an autistic semantic game with you.
> BUT TELL ME WHAT IT WOULD BE!
I already have and the general usage of the word should tell you already. I would call a society that was implemented based on communist principles, well, communist. And I would call, as does everyone else, a state that was founded on those principles a communist state, even if it had to deviate from those principles to some degree because of its size( and specially if those deviations since to be ever-present for any such state). Regardless, you only care about the semantic argument like a true autist and I dont give two fucks about it. You also seem to have given up on any other practical point you tried to make, which I see as the only thing that matters. Go sperg our somewhere else.

>>11922284
>I would call a society that was implemented based on communist principles, well, communist.
This is totally self referential, a devastatingly bad definition which tells you absolutely nothing.
What is a "communist principle"? Is free market capitalism a "communist principle"?

AGAIN. I am okay if you have a loose definition JUST TELL ME WHAT IT IS!

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

PLEASE, just define "communism", I don't really care about anything else.

>>11922284
>You also seem to have given up on any other practical point you tried to make, which I see as the only thing that matters.
Yes, because you are too stupid to see that you are arguing for communism.
Tell me where you disagree in this argument:

China is a communist Country.
China transitioned in the 21st century to one of the most important economical powers.
=> Communism is a good economic theory.

China has human rights abuses.
Democracy leads to less human rights abuses.
=> A democratized China would be a communist state with far fewer human right abuses.

=> Communism, together with democracy leads to a very good economic and social society.
=> Communism is good.

Do you disagree with ANY of that? PLEASE name the exact line you disagree with and why.

>>11921573
>begins sentence with, "no."

>>11921612
Read your post again and tell me that I am retarded.

>>11922538
and?

>>11922079
But China is poorer than the US. A similar wealth disparity is felt much worse there. A better measure would be the UN inequality-adjusted HDI.

>>11922299
>>11922302
Not the guy you're replying to but you're a fucking schizo dude. Down your meds with some basedmilk you fucking pinko.

>>11922642
>and then says, "and?"

Testing testing testing. That's all that's on the news. Why the testing?

>>11924854
Because that's how you know where the virus is in a community. The people testing positive are spreaders. If you test and figure out who they are you can isolate them and trace and test the people they've interacted with.

>>11916970
>the wait can be a month
I don't know about whatever backwards state you live in but in my cunt I got two tests back in less than 24 hours