J
John Larkin
Guest
On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 11:37:53 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
No shortage of smug either.
No shortage of smug either.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 11:37:53 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
No shortage of smug either.
On 7/13/2020 10:09 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:
Am 12.07.20 um 19:47 schrieb jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com:
He was probably not elected in 2016.
At least not from the majority of the people.
Everyone has forgottn that Bill Clinton won with 43% and 49%. I\'m sure
it would be more memorable if Republicans played the \"they stole the
election\" game that Democrats have played every time a Republican won
since 1980. Apparently we never, ever, win an election. In 2000 Gore
made us look so much like a banana republic that Moamar Quadaffi offered
to oversee our next election, but most everyone forgot that too.
Of course Republicans win elections, their marketing is geared to a
demographic called \"diagnose-able anti-social psychopath\"
There\'s no shortage of those in America
No shortage of smug either.
J
John Larkin
Guest
On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 11:37:53 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
No shortage of smug either.
On 7/13/2020 10:09 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:
Am 12.07.20 um 19:47 schrieb jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com:
He was probably not elected in 2016.
At least not from the majority of the people.
Everyone has forgottn that Bill Clinton won with 43% and 49%. I\'m sure
it would be more memorable if Republicans played the \"they stole the
election\" game that Democrats have played every time a Republican won
since 1980. Apparently we never, ever, win an election. In 2000 Gore
made us look so much like a banana republic that Moamar Quadaffi offered
to oversee our next election, but most everyone forgot that too.
Of course Republicans win elections, their marketing is geared to a
demographic called \"diagnose-able anti-social psychopath\"
There\'s no shortage of those in America
No shortage of smug either.
B
Bill Sloman
Guest
On Sunday, July 19, 2020 at 8:10:34 AM UTC+10, John Larkin wrote:
<snip>
Mostly supplied by right-wing lunatics congratulating themselves on how clever they are in seeing through the all those self-serving schemes peddled by scientists. John Larkin is particularly proud of the gullibility that makes him a sucker for climate change denial propaganda.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Fri, 17 Jul 2020 11:37:53 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 7/13/2020 10:09 PM, Tom Del Rosso wrote:
Gerhard Hoffmann wrote:
Am 12.07.20 um 19:47 schrieb jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com:
<snip>
Of course Republicans win elections, their marketing is geared to a
demographic called \"diagnose-able anti-social psychopath\"
There\'s no shortage of those in America
No shortage of smug either.
Mostly supplied by right-wing lunatics congratulating themselves on how clever they are in seeing through the all those self-serving schemes peddled by scientists. John Larkin is particularly proud of the gullibility that makes him a sucker for climate change denial propaganda.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
B
Bill Sloman
Guest
On Sunday, July 19, 2020 at 2:24:31 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
If you had, you\'d be able to quote the text you pretend to be referring to.
<snipped more of Fred\'s absurd maunderings>
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Friday, July 17, 2020 at 10:37:51 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Saturday, July 18, 2020 at 7:07:56 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thursday, July 16, 2020 at 11:29:55 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
On Friday, July 17, 2020 at 5:06:29 AM UTC+10, bloggs.fre...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 15, 2020 at 12:16:45 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
Today\'s Proceedings of the (US) National Academy of Sciences has this paper
https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2020/06/23/2006048117.full.pdf
Apparently if you spend time spelling out what exponential growth really means, even conservatives become more willing to take social distancing seriously.
It probably won\'t work on John Larkin who is really resistant to having things spelled out for him, and wouldn\'t work for Trump, who hasn\'t got a long enough attention span to let him absorb the message.
Another of your crap cites from the Sycophants. No such conclusions can be drawn from their phony research.
In your opinion. Nobody seems to have asked you to peer-review the paper when it was first submitted to PNAS.
Their phony work was based on a weak survey on MTurk, and it does not comply with any existing standards for psychological research.
As if you would know what they were. Or could even point to place where they were codified.
They mention it right there in that paper. Do you even read this stuff???
There is a link to https://osf.io/xjwbg/ but that\'s just a link to more of the same.
There is a reference to Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychologie,Ethisches Handeln in der psychologischen Forschung: Empfehlungen der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Psychologie für Forschendeund Ethikkommissionen, (Hogrefe, Göttingen, Germany, 2018)
but that\'s just about the ethics, as you\'d have been able to work out if you could read German.
Why don\'t you try reading the body of the paper, idiot.
If you had, you\'d be able to quote the text you pretend to be referring to.
<snipped more of Fred\'s absurd maunderings>
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
D
david eather
Guest
On 16/07/2020 5:31 am, John Larkin wrote:
I think that \"linear growth\" was more about limited testing only being
slowly ramped up while the criteria for access to testing remained the
same. Looking at a short enough sequence means any trend can look \"linear\"
Bad form John. It is clearly on an exponential curve.
More testing only started when refrigerated vans were being used as
morgues and hospitals and governors talking about it started making it
onto the news.
Trump was slow on this one and still does not understand what is happening.
3000 people died in 9/11 and America went to war. Now that number (which
is growing) is starting to die daily in a pandemic, and President
Schmuck only wants to concentrate on getting re-elected.
WTF??? Why aren\'t you people storming the whitehouse? A loss of 2% of
the population is going to kill the American economy for years.
Is Trump more important than the Republican party? More important than
the economy? The country?
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 13:59:09 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 7/15/2020 1:05 PM, blocher@columbus.rr.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 15, 2020 at 12:16:45 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
Today\'s Proceedings of the (US) National Academy of Sciences has this paper
https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2020/06/23/2006048117.full.pdf
Apparently if you spend time spelling out what exponential growth really means, even conservatives become more willing to take social distancing seriously.
It probably won\'t work on John Larkin who is really resistant to having things spelled out for him, and wouldn\'t work for Trump, who hasn\'t got a long enough attention span to let him absorb the message.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Trying to \"educate\" people about exponential growth with an obtuse paper is not a good strategy. What is the takeaway in a couple of sentences?
I will tell you, but you\'ll have to pay me. But only in pennies - I work
very cheap!
Just take this checkerboard and put one penny on the first square, two
on the second, four on the third...
And you soon run out of pennies, and places to stack them. That\'s the
reality of exponential growth in real systems.
Look at the covid case curves. They went linear very early on, at a
few per cent of the ultimate peak.
Don\'t you people ever analyze systems?
I think that \"linear growth\" was more about limited testing only being
slowly ramped up while the criteria for access to testing remained the
same. Looking at a short enough sequence means any trend can look \"linear\"
Bad form John. It is clearly on an exponential curve.
More testing only started when refrigerated vans were being used as
morgues and hospitals and governors talking about it started making it
onto the news.
Trump was slow on this one and still does not understand what is happening.
3000 people died in 9/11 and America went to war. Now that number (which
is growing) is starting to die daily in a pandemic, and President
Schmuck only wants to concentrate on getting re-elected.
WTF??? Why aren\'t you people storming the whitehouse? A loss of 2% of
the population is going to kill the American economy for years.
Is Trump more important than the Republican party? More important than
the economy? The country?
D
david eather
Guest
On 16/07/2020 5:31 am, John Larkin wrote:
I think that \"linear growth\" was more about limited testing only being
slowly ramped up while the criteria for access to testing remained the
same. Looking at a short enough sequence means any trend can look \"linear\"
Bad form John. It is clearly on an exponential curve.
More testing only started when refrigerated vans were being used as
morgues and hospitals and governors talking about it started making it
onto the news.
Trump was slow on this one and still does not understand what is happening.
3000 people died in 9/11 and America went to war. Now that number (which
is growing) is starting to die daily in a pandemic, and President
Schmuck only wants to concentrate on getting re-elected.
WTF??? Why aren\'t you people storming the whitehouse? A loss of 2% of
the population is going to kill the American economy for years.
Is Trump more important than the Republican party? More important than
the economy? The country?
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 13:59:09 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 7/15/2020 1:05 PM, blocher@columbus.rr.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 15, 2020 at 12:16:45 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
Today\'s Proceedings of the (US) National Academy of Sciences has this paper
https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2020/06/23/2006048117.full.pdf
Apparently if you spend time spelling out what exponential growth really means, even conservatives become more willing to take social distancing seriously.
It probably won\'t work on John Larkin who is really resistant to having things spelled out for him, and wouldn\'t work for Trump, who hasn\'t got a long enough attention span to let him absorb the message.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Trying to \"educate\" people about exponential growth with an obtuse paper is not a good strategy. What is the takeaway in a couple of sentences?
I will tell you, but you\'ll have to pay me. But only in pennies - I work
very cheap!
Just take this checkerboard and put one penny on the first square, two
on the second, four on the third...
And you soon run out of pennies, and places to stack them. That\'s the
reality of exponential growth in real systems.
Look at the covid case curves. They went linear very early on, at a
few per cent of the ultimate peak.
Don\'t you people ever analyze systems?
I think that \"linear growth\" was more about limited testing only being
slowly ramped up while the criteria for access to testing remained the
same. Looking at a short enough sequence means any trend can look \"linear\"
Bad form John. It is clearly on an exponential curve.
More testing only started when refrigerated vans were being used as
morgues and hospitals and governors talking about it started making it
onto the news.
Trump was slow on this one and still does not understand what is happening.
3000 people died in 9/11 and America went to war. Now that number (which
is growing) is starting to die daily in a pandemic, and President
Schmuck only wants to concentrate on getting re-elected.
WTF??? Why aren\'t you people storming the whitehouse? A loss of 2% of
the population is going to kill the American economy for years.
Is Trump more important than the Republican party? More important than
the economy? The country?
S
server
Guest
On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 12:39:35 +1000, david eather
<eathDELETEer@tpg.com.au> wrote:
Daily tests in the USA have ramped up about linearly, from zero in
early March to about 800K per day now. Test density directly modulates
reported cases.
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states
See graph about 1/3 down the page. Start looks like early March to me.
The refrigerated morgues have been prepared and hyped. Have any been
used?
Who does understand what\'s happening? You, I suppose.
No, it\'s mostly killing old and infirm people who weren\'t working
much. It\'s the crazy lockdowns and insane spending that are killing
the economy.
Why do you blame Trump for a Chinese virus? He\'s been ahead of the WHO
on this.
The death total in the USA so far is 432 PPM, which is not 2% last
time I did the math. The death rate is now about 35% of peak.
UK is at 667 PPM dead. Spain is 608. Italy, 580.
The worst-hit US states are in the socialist-Democrat northeast. New
York, 1673 PPM dead. Massachusetts, 1221.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
<eathDELETEer@tpg.com.au> wrote:
On 16/07/2020 5:31 am, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 13:59:09 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 7/15/2020 1:05 PM, blocher@columbus.rr.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 15, 2020 at 12:16:45 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
Today\'s Proceedings of the (US) National Academy of Sciences has this paper
https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2020/06/23/2006048117.full.pdf
Apparently if you spend time spelling out what exponential growth really means, even conservatives become more willing to take social distancing seriously.
It probably won\'t work on John Larkin who is really resistant to having things spelled out for him, and wouldn\'t work for Trump, who hasn\'t got a long enough attention span to let him absorb the message.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Trying to \"educate\" people about exponential growth with an obtuse paper is not a good strategy. What is the takeaway in a couple of sentences?
I will tell you, but you\'ll have to pay me. But only in pennies - I work
very cheap!
Just take this checkerboard and put one penny on the first square, two
on the second, four on the third...
And you soon run out of pennies, and places to stack them. That\'s the
reality of exponential growth in real systems.
Look at the covid case curves. They went linear very early on, at a
few per cent of the ultimate peak.
Don\'t you people ever analyze systems?
I think that \"linear growth\" was more about limited testing only being
slowly ramped up while the criteria for access to testing remained the
same. Looking at a short enough sequence means any trend can look \"linear\"
Bad form John. It is clearly on an exponential curve.
Daily tests in the USA have ramped up about linearly, from zero in
early March to about 800K per day now. Test density directly modulates
reported cases.
More testing only started when refrigerated vans were being used as
morgues and hospitals and governors talking about it started making it
onto the news.
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states
See graph about 1/3 down the page. Start looks like early March to me.
The refrigerated morgues have been prepared and hyped. Have any been
used?
Trump was slow on this one and still does not understand what is happening.
Who does understand what\'s happening? You, I suppose.
3000 people died in 9/11 and America went to war. Now that number (which
is growing) is starting to die daily in a pandemic, and President
Schmuck only wants to concentrate on getting re-elected.
WTF??? Why aren\'t you people storming the whitehouse? A loss of 2% of
the population is going to kill the American economy for years.
No, it\'s mostly killing old and infirm people who weren\'t working
much. It\'s the crazy lockdowns and insane spending that are killing
the economy.
Is Trump more important than the Republican party? More important than
the economy? The country?
Why do you blame Trump for a Chinese virus? He\'s been ahead of the WHO
on this.
The death total in the USA so far is 432 PPM, which is not 2% last
time I did the math. The death rate is now about 35% of peak.
UK is at 667 PPM dead. Spain is 608. Italy, 580.
The worst-hit US states are in the socialist-Democrat northeast. New
York, 1673 PPM dead. Massachusetts, 1221.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
S
server
Guest
On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 12:39:35 +1000, david eather
<eathDELETEer@tpg.com.au> wrote:
Daily tests in the USA have ramped up about linearly, from zero in
early March to about 800K per day now. Test density directly modulates
reported cases.
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states
See graph about 1/3 down the page. Start looks like early March to me.
The refrigerated morgues have been prepared and hyped. Have any been
used?
Who does understand what\'s happening? You, I suppose.
No, it\'s mostly killing old and infirm people who weren\'t working
much. It\'s the crazy lockdowns and insane spending that are killing
the economy.
Why do you blame Trump for a Chinese virus? He\'s been ahead of the WHO
on this.
The death total in the USA so far is 432 PPM, which is not 2% last
time I did the math. The death rate is now about 35% of peak.
UK is at 667 PPM dead. Spain is 608. Italy, 580.
The worst-hit US states are in the socialist-Democrat northeast. New
York, 1673 PPM dead. Massachusetts, 1221.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
<eathDELETEer@tpg.com.au> wrote:
On 16/07/2020 5:31 am, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 13:59:09 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 7/15/2020 1:05 PM, blocher@columbus.rr.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 15, 2020 at 12:16:45 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
Today\'s Proceedings of the (US) National Academy of Sciences has this paper
https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2020/06/23/2006048117.full.pdf
Apparently if you spend time spelling out what exponential growth really means, even conservatives become more willing to take social distancing seriously.
It probably won\'t work on John Larkin who is really resistant to having things spelled out for him, and wouldn\'t work for Trump, who hasn\'t got a long enough attention span to let him absorb the message.
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
Trying to \"educate\" people about exponential growth with an obtuse paper is not a good strategy. What is the takeaway in a couple of sentences?
I will tell you, but you\'ll have to pay me. But only in pennies - I work
very cheap!
Just take this checkerboard and put one penny on the first square, two
on the second, four on the third...
And you soon run out of pennies, and places to stack them. That\'s the
reality of exponential growth in real systems.
Look at the covid case curves. They went linear very early on, at a
few per cent of the ultimate peak.
Don\'t you people ever analyze systems?
I think that \"linear growth\" was more about limited testing only being
slowly ramped up while the criteria for access to testing remained the
same. Looking at a short enough sequence means any trend can look \"linear\"
Bad form John. It is clearly on an exponential curve.
Daily tests in the USA have ramped up about linearly, from zero in
early March to about 800K per day now. Test density directly modulates
reported cases.
More testing only started when refrigerated vans were being used as
morgues and hospitals and governors talking about it started making it
onto the news.
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states
See graph about 1/3 down the page. Start looks like early March to me.
The refrigerated morgues have been prepared and hyped. Have any been
used?
Trump was slow on this one and still does not understand what is happening.
Who does understand what\'s happening? You, I suppose.
3000 people died in 9/11 and America went to war. Now that number (which
is growing) is starting to die daily in a pandemic, and President
Schmuck only wants to concentrate on getting re-elected.
WTF??? Why aren\'t you people storming the whitehouse? A loss of 2% of
the population is going to kill the American economy for years.
No, it\'s mostly killing old and infirm people who weren\'t working
much. It\'s the crazy lockdowns and insane spending that are killing
the economy.
Is Trump more important than the Republican party? More important than
the economy? The country?
Why do you blame Trump for a Chinese virus? He\'s been ahead of the WHO
on this.
The death total in the USA so far is 432 PPM, which is not 2% last
time I did the math. The death rate is now about 35% of peak.
UK is at 667 PPM dead. Spain is 608. Italy, 580.
The worst-hit US states are in the socialist-Democrat northeast. New
York, 1673 PPM dead. Massachusetts, 1221.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
W
whit3rd
Guest
On Saturday, July 18, 2020 at 3:09:20 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
It has been analyzed everywhere, and the keywords are person-person,
close contact, community, and social distance.
\"Seriously\" analyzing, is what all the fuss is about superspreaders and
attempting to quantify airborne pathways. The superspreader element of
the analysis has already sprouted a few spinoffs; blame-centric is
one, and \'the superspreaders will burn out\' is another.
Both are nutty, of course; human society cannot use blame-the-minority
reasoning if we can trust history, and the \'superspreader\' might be a
role, not a player, so as a player attains immunity, his role (bartender?)
just passes to another individual. The transience of occupations kills
the possibility of burnout in that scenario.
LA has about 1000 PPM dead. Manhattan is about 2000. I wonder why so
many in a few hot spots. I don\'t think I\'ve seen this seriously
analyzed anywhere.
It has been analyzed everywhere, and the keywords are person-person,
close contact, community, and social distance.
\"Seriously\" analyzing, is what all the fuss is about superspreaders and
attempting to quantify airborne pathways. The superspreader element of
the analysis has already sprouted a few spinoffs; blame-centric is
one, and \'the superspreaders will burn out\' is another.
Both are nutty, of course; human society cannot use blame-the-minority
reasoning if we can trust history, and the \'superspreader\' might be a
role, not a player, so as a player attains immunity, his role (bartender?)
just passes to another individual. The transience of occupations kills
the possibility of burnout in that scenario.
W
whit3rd
Guest
On Saturday, July 18, 2020 at 8:09:57 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
That\'s clearly irrational. Neither China nor Trump are blamed for the virus.
Trump is sometimes blamed for incoherent messaging and other responses
to the situation, as is proper.
And, \'ahead of the WHO\' is an odd claim; we, as a nation,
are MEMBERS of WHO.
We haven\'t left it. Trump simply doesn\'t act as a member, but as an antagonist.
And, claiming to be \'ahead\' is a classic cheap shot. I\'m ahead of you, by the way!
Why do you blame Trump for a Chinese virus? He\'s been ahead of the WHO
on this.
That\'s clearly irrational. Neither China nor Trump are blamed for the virus.
Trump is sometimes blamed for incoherent messaging and other responses
to the situation, as is proper.
And, \'ahead of the WHO\' is an odd claim; we, as a nation,
are MEMBERS of WHO.
We haven\'t left it. Trump simply doesn\'t act as a member, but as an antagonist.
And, claiming to be \'ahead\' is a classic cheap shot. I\'m ahead of you, by the way!
W
whit3rd
Guest
On Saturday, July 18, 2020 at 8:09:57 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
That\'s clearly irrational. Neither China nor Trump are blamed for the virus.
Trump is sometimes blamed for incoherent messaging and other responses
to the situation, as is proper.
And, \'ahead of the WHO\' is an odd claim; we, as a nation,
are MEMBERS of WHO.
We haven\'t left it. Trump simply doesn\'t act as a member, but as an antagonist.
And, claiming to be \'ahead\' is a classic cheap shot. I\'m ahead of you, by the way!
Why do you blame Trump for a Chinese virus? He\'s been ahead of the WHO
on this.
That\'s clearly irrational. Neither China nor Trump are blamed for the virus.
Trump is sometimes blamed for incoherent messaging and other responses
to the situation, as is proper.
And, \'ahead of the WHO\' is an odd claim; we, as a nation,
are MEMBERS of WHO.
We haven\'t left it. Trump simply doesn\'t act as a member, but as an antagonist.
And, claiming to be \'ahead\' is a classic cheap shot. I\'m ahead of you, by the way!
S
server
Guest
On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 20:30:39 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
wrote:
Design something and we\'ll see.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
wrote:
On Saturday, July 18, 2020 at 8:09:57 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Why do you blame Trump for a Chinese virus? He\'s been ahead of the WHO
on this.
That\'s clearly irrational. Neither China nor Trump are blamed for the virus.
Trump is sometimes blamed for incoherent messaging and other responses
to the situation, as is proper.
And, \'ahead of the WHO\' is an odd claim; we, as a nation,
are MEMBERS of WHO.
We haven\'t left it. Trump simply doesn\'t act as a member, but as an antagonist.
And, claiming to be \'ahead\' is a classic cheap shot. I\'m ahead of you, by the way!
Design something and we\'ll see.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
S
server
Guest
On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 20:30:39 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
wrote:
Design something and we\'ll see.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
wrote:
On Saturday, July 18, 2020 at 8:09:57 PM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Why do you blame Trump for a Chinese virus? He\'s been ahead of the WHO
on this.
That\'s clearly irrational. Neither China nor Trump are blamed for the virus.
Trump is sometimes blamed for incoherent messaging and other responses
to the situation, as is proper.
And, \'ahead of the WHO\' is an odd claim; we, as a nation,
are MEMBERS of WHO.
We haven\'t left it. Trump simply doesn\'t act as a member, but as an antagonist.
And, claiming to be \'ahead\' is a classic cheap shot. I\'m ahead of you, by the way!
Design something and we\'ll see.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
W
whit3rd
Guest
On Saturday, July 18, 2020 at 3:09:20 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
It has been analyzed everywhere, and the keywords are person-person,
close contact, community, and social distance.
\"Seriously\" analyzing, is what all the fuss is about superspreaders and
attempting to quantify airborne pathways. The superspreader element of
the analysis has already sprouted a few spinoffs; blame-centric is
one, and \'the superspreaders will burn out\' is another.
Both are nutty, of course; human society cannot use blame-the-minority
reasoning if we can trust history, and the \'superspreader\' might be a
role, not a player, so as a player attains immunity, his role (bartender?)
just passes to another individual. The transience of occupations kills
the possibility of burnout in that scenario.
LA has about 1000 PPM dead. Manhattan is about 2000. I wonder why so
many in a few hot spots. I don\'t think I\'ve seen this seriously
analyzed anywhere.
It has been analyzed everywhere, and the keywords are person-person,
close contact, community, and social distance.
\"Seriously\" analyzing, is what all the fuss is about superspreaders and
attempting to quantify airborne pathways. The superspreader element of
the analysis has already sprouted a few spinoffs; blame-centric is
one, and \'the superspreaders will burn out\' is another.
Both are nutty, of course; human society cannot use blame-the-minority
reasoning if we can trust history, and the \'superspreader\' might be a
role, not a player, so as a player attains immunity, his role (bartender?)
just passes to another individual. The transience of occupations kills
the possibility of burnout in that scenario.
R
Robert Baer
Guest
Robert Baer wrote:
is NOT zero.
In fact, the Vcb varies as the waveform: +/- 0.167V triangle Vb(Q1),
+/- 0.167V sine Vb(Q2).
Mmm.. running a transistor between 167mV normal collector voltage,to
fairly deep saturation of 167mV can give non-symmetrical drive
distortion which can cause undesirable harmonics.
Changing R1, R6 to 95.3K will drastically improve that.
Gain, that is up to the student.
Thanks.
You DO know the description is incorrect; the Vcb of the transistorsbitrex wrote:
What\'s the state of the art in broadband DC-to-daylight (well, a few
MHz, anyway) practical analog triangle-to-sine shapers?
Looks like the last discussion here was in 2017. Any new developments?
Here\'s a circuit someone posted as of April 2020:
http://www.till.com/articles/sineshaper/
* This scheme appears to be the best; a wowser.
Here\'s an array of lateral PNP diff-pairs, looks more suitable for as
it says implementation on chip than anything discrete but idk.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.664.9270&rep=rep1&type=pdf
* A good idea and start; chip layout and definitely processing need
tweaking.
Anyone know what the gist of this now gone-for-obv-reasons circuit was?
http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/PWL_Sine_Wave_Shaper_Using_LM555_Plus_OpAmps.png
* The operation timed out when attempting to contact
www.analog-innovations.com.
*Â A different resource for same info would be greatly appreciated.
  Thanks.
is NOT zero.
In fact, the Vcb varies as the waveform: +/- 0.167V triangle Vb(Q1),
+/- 0.167V sine Vb(Q2).
Mmm.. running a transistor between 167mV normal collector voltage,to
fairly deep saturation of 167mV can give non-symmetrical drive
distortion which can cause undesirable harmonics.
Changing R1, R6 to 95.3K will drastically improve that.
Gain, that is up to the student.
Thanks.
R
Robert Baer
Guest
Robert Baer wrote:
is NOT zero.
In fact, the Vcb varies as the waveform: +/- 0.167V triangle Vb(Q1),
+/- 0.167V sine Vb(Q2).
Mmm.. running a transistor between 167mV normal collector voltage,to
fairly deep saturation of 167mV can give non-symmetrical drive
distortion which can cause undesirable harmonics.
Changing R1, R6 to 95.3K will drastically improve that.
Gain, that is up to the student.
Thanks.
You DO know the description is incorrect; the Vcb of the transistorsbitrex wrote:
What\'s the state of the art in broadband DC-to-daylight (well, a few
MHz, anyway) practical analog triangle-to-sine shapers?
Looks like the last discussion here was in 2017. Any new developments?
Here\'s a circuit someone posted as of April 2020:
http://www.till.com/articles/sineshaper/
* This scheme appears to be the best; a wowser.
Here\'s an array of lateral PNP diff-pairs, looks more suitable for as
it says implementation on chip than anything discrete but idk.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.664.9270&rep=rep1&type=pdf
* A good idea and start; chip layout and definitely processing need
tweaking.
Anyone know what the gist of this now gone-for-obv-reasons circuit was?
http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/PWL_Sine_Wave_Shaper_Using_LM555_Plus_OpAmps.png
* The operation timed out when attempting to contact
www.analog-innovations.com.
*Â A different resource for same info would be greatly appreciated.
  Thanks.
is NOT zero.
In fact, the Vcb varies as the waveform: +/- 0.167V triangle Vb(Q1),
+/- 0.167V sine Vb(Q2).
Mmm.. running a transistor between 167mV normal collector voltage,to
fairly deep saturation of 167mV can give non-symmetrical drive
distortion which can cause undesirable harmonics.
Changing R1, R6 to 95.3K will drastically improve that.
Gain, that is up to the student.
Thanks.
R
Robert Baer
Guest
Robert Baer wrote:
is NOT zero.
In fact, the Vcb varies as the waveform: +/- 0.167V triangle Vb(Q1),
+/- 0.167V sine Vb(Q2).
Mmm.. running a transistor between 167mV normal collector voltage,to
fairly deep saturation of 167mV can give non-symmetrical drive
distortion which can cause undesirable harmonics.
Changing R1, R6 to 95.3K will drastically improve that.
Gain, that is up to the student.
Thanks.
You DO know the description is incorrect; the Vcb of the transistorsbitrex wrote:
What\'s the state of the art in broadband DC-to-daylight (well, a few
MHz, anyway) practical analog triangle-to-sine shapers?
Looks like the last discussion here was in 2017. Any new developments?
Here\'s a circuit someone posted as of April 2020:
http://www.till.com/articles/sineshaper/
* This scheme appears to be the best; a wowser.
Here\'s an array of lateral PNP diff-pairs, looks more suitable for as
it says implementation on chip than anything discrete but idk.
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.664.9270&rep=rep1&type=pdf
* A good idea and start; chip layout and definitely processing need
tweaking.
Anyone know what the gist of this now gone-for-obv-reasons circuit was?
http://www.analog-innovations.com/SED/PWL_Sine_Wave_Shaper_Using_LM555_Plus_OpAmps.png
* The operation timed out when attempting to contact
www.analog-innovations.com.
*Â A different resource for same info would be greatly appreciated.
  Thanks.
is NOT zero.
In fact, the Vcb varies as the waveform: +/- 0.167V triangle Vb(Q1),
+/- 0.167V sine Vb(Q2).
Mmm.. running a transistor between 167mV normal collector voltage,to
fairly deep saturation of 167mV can give non-symmetrical drive
distortion which can cause undesirable harmonics.
Changing R1, R6 to 95.3K will drastically improve that.
Gain, that is up to the student.
Thanks.
B
Bill Sloman
Guest
On Sunday, July 19, 2020 at 1:09:57 PM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Most of us can do it. Larkin clearly can\'t.
Only in John Larkin\'s bizarre universe. More infections clearly drive more testing, but you should be getting 5% positive outcomes or less if you are doing enough testing. The US was getting 10% positive outcomes for quite a while, but that\'s nowhere near enough to justify a claim that more tests created new infections.
This does seem to be part of his mad delusion that almost everybody has already had Covid-19 and the US is on the verge of reaching herd immunity, so everybody can go back to work.
Friday\'s US new case per day figure hit 74,987, so it never was a particulary reliable prediction
Wait a fortnight, until the 4% of the new cases who are likely to die have got around to doing it.
Nobody you are prepared to pay any attention to. The US situation is simple enough - there\'s an infectious virus on the loose and it infecting some 70,000 new victims every day. Other countries have worked out how to slow the progress of the epidemic, but not the US.
There\'s nothing crazy about locking a country down to slow down the spread of an infectious disease. South Korea didn\'t bother - vigorous contact tracing does the job better, and does much less damage to the economy.
What\'s crazy is not doing it thoroughly enough to get the new case number right down in a couple of weeks.
Really?
But with new case per day numbers having doubled over the past couple of weeks its going catch up again - it is a lagging indicator. The median time from detection of infection to death is about 18 days (for those who end up dead).
You\'ve got more area to get infected than the UK, Spain and Italy - you will catch up eventually.
Far-right thinking doesn\'t seem to be an effective prophylactic - why would the virus care?
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 12:39:35 +1000, david eather
eathDELETEer@tpg.com.au> wrote:
On 16/07/2020 5:31 am, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 13:59:09 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 7/15/2020 1:05 PM, blocher@columbus.rr.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 15, 2020 at 12:16:45 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
Today\'s Proceedings of the (US) National Academy of Sciences has this paper
https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2020/06/23/2006048117.full.pdf
Apparently if you spend time spelling out what exponential growth really means, even conservatives become more willing to take social distancing seriously.
It probably won\'t work on John Larkin who is really resistant to having things spelled out for him, and wouldn\'t work for Trump, who hasn\'t got a long enough attention span to let him absorb the message.
Trying to \"educate\" people about exponential growth with an obtuse paper is not a good strategy. What is the takeaway in a couple of sentences?
I will tell you, but you\'ll have to pay me. But only in pennies - I work
very cheap!
Just take this checkerboard and put one penny on the first square, two
on the second, four on the third...
And you soon run out of pennies, and places to stack them. That\'s the
reality of exponential growth in real systems.
Look at the covid case curves. They went linear very early on, at a
few per cent of the ultimate peak.
Don\'t you people ever analyze systems?
Most of us can do it. Larkin clearly can\'t.
I think that \"linear growth\" was more about limited testing only being
slowly ramped up while the criteria for access to testing remained the
same. Looking at a short enough sequence means any trend can look \"linear\"
Bad form John. It is clearly on an exponential curve.
Daily tests in the USA have ramped up about linearly, from zero in
early March to about 800K per day now. Test density directly modulates
reported cases.
Only in John Larkin\'s bizarre universe. More infections clearly drive more testing, but you should be getting 5% positive outcomes or less if you are doing enough testing. The US was getting 10% positive outcomes for quite a while, but that\'s nowhere near enough to justify a claim that more tests created new infections.
This does seem to be part of his mad delusion that almost everybody has already had Covid-19 and the US is on the verge of reaching herd immunity, so everybody can go back to work.
Friday\'s US new case per day figure hit 74,987, so it never was a particulary reliable prediction
More testing only started when refrigerated vans were being used as
morgues and hospitals and governors talking about it started making it
onto the news.
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states
See graph about 1/3 down the page. Start looks like early March to me.
The refrigerated morgues have been prepared and hyped. Have any been
used?
Wait a fortnight, until the 4% of the new cases who are likely to die have got around to doing it.
Trump was slow on this one and still does not understand what is happening.
Who does understand what\'s happening? You, I suppose.
Nobody you are prepared to pay any attention to. The US situation is simple enough - there\'s an infectious virus on the loose and it infecting some 70,000 new victims every day. Other countries have worked out how to slow the progress of the epidemic, but not the US.
3000 people died in 9/11 and America went to war. Now that number (which
is growing) is starting to die daily in a pandemic, and President
Schmuck only wants to concentrate on getting re-elected.
WTF??? Why aren\'t you people storming the whitehouse? A loss of 2% of
the population is going to kill the American economy for years.
No, it\'s mostly killing old and infirm people who weren\'t working
much. It\'s the crazy lock downs and insane spending that are killing
the economy.
There\'s nothing crazy about locking a country down to slow down the spread of an infectious disease. South Korea didn\'t bother - vigorous contact tracing does the job better, and does much less damage to the economy.
What\'s crazy is not doing it thoroughly enough to get the new case number right down in a couple of weeks.
Is Trump more important than the Republican party? More important than
the economy? The country?
Why do you blame Trump for a Chinese virus? He\'s been ahead of the WHO
on this.
Really?
The death total in the USA so far is 432 PPM, which is not 2% last
time I did the math. The death rate is now about 35% of peak.
But with new case per day numbers having doubled over the past couple of weeks its going catch up again - it is a lagging indicator. The median time from detection of infection to death is about 18 days (for those who end up dead).
UK is at 667 PPM dead. Spain is 608. Italy, 580.
The worst-hit US states are in the socialist-Democrat northeast. New
York, 1673 PPM dead. Massachusetts, 1221.
You\'ve got more area to get infected than the UK, Spain and Italy - you will catch up eventually.
Far-right thinking doesn\'t seem to be an effective prophylactic - why would the virus care?
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
B
Bill Sloman
Guest
On Sunday, July 19, 2020 at 1:09:57 PM UTC+10, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
Most of us can do it. Larkin clearly can\'t.
Only in John Larkin\'s bizarre universe. More infections clearly drive more testing, but you should be getting 5% positive outcomes or less if you are doing enough testing. The US was getting 10% positive outcomes for quite a while, but that\'s nowhere near enough to justify a claim that more tests created new infections.
This does seem to be part of his mad delusion that almost everybody has already had Covid-19 and the US is on the verge of reaching herd immunity, so everybody can go back to work.
Friday\'s US new case per day figure hit 74,987, so it never was a particulary reliable prediction
Wait a fortnight, until the 4% of the new cases who are likely to die have got around to doing it.
Nobody you are prepared to pay any attention to. The US situation is simple enough - there\'s an infectious virus on the loose and it infecting some 70,000 new victims every day. Other countries have worked out how to slow the progress of the epidemic, but not the US.
There\'s nothing crazy about locking a country down to slow down the spread of an infectious disease. South Korea didn\'t bother - vigorous contact tracing does the job better, and does much less damage to the economy.
What\'s crazy is not doing it thoroughly enough to get the new case number right down in a couple of weeks.
Really?
But with new case per day numbers having doubled over the past couple of weeks its going catch up again - it is a lagging indicator. The median time from detection of infection to death is about 18 days (for those who end up dead).
You\'ve got more area to get infected than the UK, Spain and Italy - you will catch up eventually.
Far-right thinking doesn\'t seem to be an effective prophylactic - why would the virus care?
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney
On Sun, 19 Jul 2020 12:39:35 +1000, david eather
eathDELETEer@tpg.com.au> wrote:
On 16/07/2020 5:31 am, John Larkin wrote:
On Wed, 15 Jul 2020 13:59:09 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 7/15/2020 1:05 PM, blocher@columbus.rr.com wrote:
On Wednesday, July 15, 2020 at 12:16:45 AM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:
Today\'s Proceedings of the (US) National Academy of Sciences has this paper
https://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2020/06/23/2006048117.full.pdf
Apparently if you spend time spelling out what exponential growth really means, even conservatives become more willing to take social distancing seriously.
It probably won\'t work on John Larkin who is really resistant to having things spelled out for him, and wouldn\'t work for Trump, who hasn\'t got a long enough attention span to let him absorb the message.
Trying to \"educate\" people about exponential growth with an obtuse paper is not a good strategy. What is the takeaway in a couple of sentences?
I will tell you, but you\'ll have to pay me. But only in pennies - I work
very cheap!
Just take this checkerboard and put one penny on the first square, two
on the second, four on the third...
And you soon run out of pennies, and places to stack them. That\'s the
reality of exponential growth in real systems.
Look at the covid case curves. They went linear very early on, at a
few per cent of the ultimate peak.
Don\'t you people ever analyze systems?
Most of us can do it. Larkin clearly can\'t.
I think that \"linear growth\" was more about limited testing only being
slowly ramped up while the criteria for access to testing remained the
same. Looking at a short enough sequence means any trend can look \"linear\"
Bad form John. It is clearly on an exponential curve.
Daily tests in the USA have ramped up about linearly, from zero in
early March to about 800K per day now. Test density directly modulates
reported cases.
Only in John Larkin\'s bizarre universe. More infections clearly drive more testing, but you should be getting 5% positive outcomes or less if you are doing enough testing. The US was getting 10% positive outcomes for quite a while, but that\'s nowhere near enough to justify a claim that more tests created new infections.
This does seem to be part of his mad delusion that almost everybody has already had Covid-19 and the US is on the verge of reaching herd immunity, so everybody can go back to work.
Friday\'s US new case per day figure hit 74,987, so it never was a particulary reliable prediction
More testing only started when refrigerated vans were being used as
morgues and hospitals and governors talking about it started making it
onto the news.
https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/individual-states
See graph about 1/3 down the page. Start looks like early March to me.
The refrigerated morgues have been prepared and hyped. Have any been
used?
Wait a fortnight, until the 4% of the new cases who are likely to die have got around to doing it.
Trump was slow on this one and still does not understand what is happening.
Who does understand what\'s happening? You, I suppose.
Nobody you are prepared to pay any attention to. The US situation is simple enough - there\'s an infectious virus on the loose and it infecting some 70,000 new victims every day. Other countries have worked out how to slow the progress of the epidemic, but not the US.
3000 people died in 9/11 and America went to war. Now that number (which
is growing) is starting to die daily in a pandemic, and President
Schmuck only wants to concentrate on getting re-elected.
WTF??? Why aren\'t you people storming the whitehouse? A loss of 2% of
the population is going to kill the American economy for years.
No, it\'s mostly killing old and infirm people who weren\'t working
much. It\'s the crazy lock downs and insane spending that are killing
the economy.
There\'s nothing crazy about locking a country down to slow down the spread of an infectious disease. South Korea didn\'t bother - vigorous contact tracing does the job better, and does much less damage to the economy.
What\'s crazy is not doing it thoroughly enough to get the new case number right down in a couple of weeks.
Is Trump more important than the Republican party? More important than
the economy? The country?
Why do you blame Trump for a Chinese virus? He\'s been ahead of the WHO
on this.
Really?
The death total in the USA so far is 432 PPM, which is not 2% last
time I did the math. The death rate is now about 35% of peak.
But with new case per day numbers having doubled over the past couple of weeks its going catch up again - it is a lagging indicator. The median time from detection of infection to death is about 18 days (for those who end up dead).
UK is at 667 PPM dead. Spain is 608. Italy, 580.
The worst-hit US states are in the socialist-Democrat northeast. New
York, 1673 PPM dead. Massachusetts, 1221.
You\'ve got more area to get infected than the UK, Spain and Italy - you will catch up eventually.
Far-right thinking doesn\'t seem to be an effective prophylactic - why would the virus care?
--
Bill Sloman, Sydney