Zero Hedge

2021-04-13 19:00:46
2021-04-13 18:40:44
2021-04-13 18:26:47
2021-04-13 18:21:46
2021-04-13 18:01:48
2021-04-13 18:00:44
2021-04-13 17:40:43
2021-04-13 17:20:45
2021-04-13 17:14:41
2021-04-13 17:02:09
2021-04-13 17:00:01
2021-04-13 16:59:01
2021-04-13 16:40:44
2021-04-13 16:20:40
2021-04-13 16:01:46
2021-04-13 15:55:39
2021-04-13 15:52:53
2021-04-13 15:52:12
2021-04-13 15:44:41
2021-04-13 15:40:41

Crude Oil

    人们现在如何致富
    How People Get Rich Now
    >那为什么会有问题呢?

    老实说,我认为Ayn Rand人群缺少一些巡回赛。好吧,这是粗略的说法,但我们只能说这就像色盲,但出于道德考虑。大量的演讲都不会使色盲人看到红色。这就是它的样子。

    这些“回路”在调节群体行为方面起着重要作用。缺少它们,您就为发生极坏的事情打开了大门。这就是为什么最好谨慎对待自由主义和相关意识形态的原因。

    > Why is it a problem then?

    I honestly think the Ayn Rand crowd are missing a few circuits. Well, that's a crude way of putting it, but let's just say it's like color blindness but for ethics. No amount of oratory will make a color-blind person see red. And that's just the way it is.

    Those "circuits" play an important role in regulating how groups behave. Lacking them, you open the door for extremely bad things to happen. This is why libertarianism and related ideologies should be treated with extreme caution at best.

    Florin_Andrei 2021-04-13 18:26:49 view on HN
    美国机构呼吁暂停强生疫苗
    US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine
    对我来说,这似乎有点不足。

    就第三阶段的监测还远远没有完成,并且根本没有“第四阶段”(确认)试验数据的情况而言,这是非常不寻常的情况。在正常的研究过程中,这就是我们捕获罕见但持续的不良反应的方式。

    因此,如果我们在正常时间范围内进行了完整的试验,那么显然会有不同的计算方法。

    但是根据我们目前的了解,这六起事件实际上可能比粗暴地使用六起分子和七百万起分母更为正常。

    暂停以评估数据并允许任何滞后解决审慎问题。

    而且,尽管要到很晚才能量化这一点非常困难,但如果那样的话,我想这只会造成暂时的疫苗犹豫,而且只会在高风险层之外,这是完全合理的。

    对于低风险阶层的人来说,首先要等到RCT监测结束就没有问题,即使不良事件不是该决定的基础。

    This take seems a little short-shrift to me.

    This is a highly unusual situation insofar as phase III monitoring is far from complete and there is no 'phase IV' (confirmatory) trial data at all yet. In the normal course of research, this is how we'd catch rare but consistent adverse effects.

    So, if we had complete trials on a normal timeframe, then obviously there's a different calculus to apply.

    But given what we know at this moment, these six incidents might actually be far more normal than the crude use of six as numerator and seven million as a denominator.

    A pause to assess the data and allow any lag to resolve seems prudent.

    And, while this will be very difficult to quantify until much later, if then, I surmise that this will only create temporary vaccine hesitancy and only outside the high-risk tier, which is perfectly rational.

    For people in the low-risk tier, there's nothing wrong with waiting until the conclusion of the RCT monitoring in the first place, even if adverse events weren't the basis of that decision.

    jMyles 2021-04-13 12:02:42 view on HN
    一场将破坏环境定为国际罪行的运动
    A campaign to make environmental destruction an international crime
    我的问题是,数千年来的人类活动一直集中在利用资源和基本消耗地球上。例如,我们在铁丰富的地方采集铁矿石,然后将其转化为产品并在全球范围内传播,因此很难再利用它们。我们采用原油并将一部分转化为塑料,这种塑料很难再利用,而我们燃烧另一部分则是不可逆的。

    而且我们要大规模地这样做,我们需要这样做,以便拥有毒品,房屋,汽车,能源等等。您不能在没有采矿的情况下制作太阳能电池板。没有拖拉机等,您就无法养活70亿人。

    因此,人类以某种方式吞噬了地球。在100万年中,我们可能再也没有剩余的原油了。但是我们应该在这里停留的时间远远超过一百万年。

    就我所知,在我看来,这些东西都是人为的。即使这两种事物都消耗大自然并且在数百万年内是不可持续的,这也很糟糕,这是可以的。

    一个问题是,只要我们被束缚在地球上,只有两种选择。要么以某种形式的原始主义,回到石器时代(而不是青铜时代,这是采矿的时代),并将人口减少到今天的不到1%。或是殖民太空并“利用”地球(污染,采矿,减少多样性都是一种消费),那么几乎所有的事情我们都将能够进行足够的改进以殖民太空,然后在更广阔的范围内开始这种消费,这是无限的(人类)可能无法传播到整个宇宙)。

    第二个问题是,我们才刚刚起步,甚至在使行星适合居住,改变其轨迹等方面甚至没有最少的经验。要到达那里,我们需要高度投机的科学。为了到达那里,我们需要资金来支持它。要有资金,我们需要利润。为了获得利润,我们需要有效的市场。要拥有有效的市场,我们需要自由。您可能知道,任何以“全球运动……”开头的事物肯定会降低自由度。

    My problem is that human activity for thousands of years is focused on using resources and basically consuming the planet. We take for example iron ore in a places rich with iron, we turn them into the product and spread them across the world, so it is harder to reuse them. We take crude oil and transform some part to plastic, which is harder to reuse and we burn another part, which is irreversible.

    And we do it on a huge scale, we need to do it to have drugs, houses, cars, energy, whatever. You can't make a solar panel without mining. You cannot feed 7 bln of people without tractors, etc.

    So humankind somehow consumes the Earth. In 1 million of years, we may no longer have any crude oil left. But we are supposed to be here for much longer than 1 million of years.

    As I know this, it seems to me, that these things are artificial cutoff. This is bad and that is ok, even when both things consume nature and are unsustainable for millions of years.

    A problem is, as long as we are bound to the Earth, there are only two options. Either some form of primitivism, return back to the stone age (not to bronze age, it is mining) and reduce a population to <1% of today. Or to colonize space and "use" Earth (pollution, mining, reduction of diversity is all consumation) and everything so little we will be able to improve enough to colonize space and then start this consumation on much wider scale, that is unlimited (humankind isn't probably able to spread over the whole universe).

    A problem with the second is that we are just in the beginning and we don't even have a smallest experience in things like making planets habitable, changing their trajectories, etc. To get there, we need highly speculative science. To get there, we need funds to support it. To have funds, we need profits. To have profits, we need efficient markets. To have efficient markets, we need freedom. And you probably know, anything starting with "The global campaign..." of any kind is definitely going to lower freedom.

    jiriknesl 2021-04-12 13:21:16 view on HN
    我以为我儿子永远不会使用的技术
    Technologies I thought my son would never use
    我愿意在这里被称为Scrooge,Luddite和c,然后我去了:

    > 2.没有专用的相机和便携式摄像机我快40岁了。我(最终)拥有一部智能手机。我也拥有一台好的数码相机。我为“ Mountain View的领先技术公司”测试了智能手机相机已有好几年了。

    我完全知道这句话,“您拥有的最好的相机就是随身携带的相机”。

    有一天,我看到一位同事指着我的数码相机说:“那种相机已经过时了”。我对此并不满意,拥有它并在质量和可用性方面都没有问题的情况下使用它,我并不后悔。外出拍照时,请带上相机。当我不接受时,我接受我必须接受智能手机的质量。

    > 7.他不会去看我喜欢的电影(和电视)的电影。我在家里和外面看。

    我出去看电影是为了体验并摆脱生活空间。不后悔。我性格内向。

    > 8.他不会使用鼠标我无法使用触控板或“鼠标按钮”站立[这有更粗略的用词,请以ThinkPads上的红色表示]。

    这对我来说是一生的鼠标,因为它实际上是有用的。

    > 10.他不会使用遥控器对于我的专用于观看6英尺外的电影和电视的计算机,蓝牙鼠标是否算作“遥控器”?

    > 14.他永远不会使用传真机如果只有一些我需要处理的企业或政府是相同的。

    I’m willing to be called Scrooge, Luddite, &c here, and here I go:

    > 2. No Dedicated Cameras and Camcorders I’m almost 40. I (finally) own a smart-phone. I also own a good digital camera. I tested smartphone cameras for “a leading tech company in Mountain View” for several years.

    I’m fully aware of the saying, “The best camera you have is the one you have with you”.

    One day I saw a coworker pointing to my digital camera and saying “That type of camera is obsolete”. I didn’t feel good about that, and I have no regrets owning it and still using it with no issues for quality or availability. When I go out for pictures, I bring my camera; when I don’t, I accept I have to accept smartphone quality.

    > 7. He Won’t Go to the Movies I love movies (and television). I watch at home and out.

    I go out to the movies for the experience and to get out of the living space. No regrets. I'm an introvert.

    > 8. He Won’t Use a Mouse I cannot stand using a trackpad or the “mouse button” [there are more crude words for it, think the red thing on ThinkPads].

    It is a mouse for me for life because it’s actually useable.

    > 10. He Won’t Use a Remote Control Does a bluetooth mouse count as “remote control” for my computer dedicated for watching movies and television 6 feet away?

    > 14. He’ll Never Use a Fax Machine If only some businesses or government I need to deal with was the same.

    drdeadringer 2021-04-11 21:56:53 view on HN
    虚幻引擎4工程消防员的自白(2018)
    Confessions of an Unreal Engine 4 Engineering Firefighter (2018)
    我要弯腰说你不拥有现代的VR耳机吗?

    虽然,您仍然可以并且有这种观点,但我很好奇。

    老实说,即使您没有所有权,也并不是说我们应该驳回您的意见。老实说,这可以说意味着更多,或者我应该说可能意味着更多。

    突出的是,您是否认为这些是“游戏不会增长”或“虚拟现实使用率不会增长”的良好论据?

    我在考虑视频游戏何时开始流行,因为这是一个非常好的imo。

    〜*电视/游戏眼睛问题〜*有限的控制功能〜*非常粗糙的接口〜*昂贵的硬件(原始PC游戏甚至N64的价格都在100美元以上)

    因此,如果我们没有接近理想,那不值得吗? “很长的路要走。”,是的,大概是……所以?

    如果您希望今天甚至五年内的VR成为“矩阵”或VR的圣杯,那么您会失望的。

    要说的这个假设全是:“ VR不会增长很多,因为我们与Matrix vr经验相去甚远”并不是完全不合理的,但我个人认为它确实很弱,并且在许多历史上已被证明是错误的行业。

    I'm going to go out on a limb and say you don't own a modern VR headset ?

    Although, you still could and have this opinion I'm just curious.

    Honestly even if you don't own one I'm not saying we should dismiss your opinion. Honestly it arguably means more or I should say could mean more.

    The thing that sticks out to me is, do you think these are good arguments for "games won't grow" or "Vr usage won't grow" ?

    I'm thinking about when video games first were gaining popularity since it's a really good comparison imo.

    ~ * tv/game eye problems ~ * limited controls ~ * very crude interfaces ~ * expensive hardware (thinking of original pc games to even the N64 $100+)

    So if we're not close to the ideal then it's not worth it ? "Matrix days is a long way off.", yeah it probably is... so ?

    If you want VR of today or even in 5 years to be the "Matrix" or the holy grail of VR then yes you will be dissapointed.

    All that to say this hypothesis you're proposing : "Vr won't grow a whole lot because we're far away from the Matrix vr experience" is not totally unreasonable but I personally think it's really weak and historically proven wrong in so many industries.

    hackRn3975 2021-04-11 17:43:10 view on HN
    虚幻引擎4工程消防员的自白(2018)
    Confessions of an Unreal Engine 4 Engineering Firefighter (2018)
    我不认为VR将会增长很多。我认为我们在草坪割草机人/黑客帝国时代期待的VR距离还有很长的路要走。我们今天拥有的只是电视,您可以将它们粘在眼睛上,这与我们几十年来一直幻想在科幻小说中看到的东西并没有真正的距离。

    *大约2小时后,大多数头戴式耳机可能不够好,不会引起头痛。我也认为它们可能会导致眼睛问题。

    *目前,我们只有非常有限的几种感官。 (触摸,味道和气味距离可用还有很长的路要走。)

    *与VR交互的方式仍然很粗糙。仍然使用传统的控制器或充裕的类似Kinect的界面。这就需要一个昂贵的跑步机之类的设备来防止您撞到墙壁。

    *耳机仍然很贵。运行能够利用头戴式耳机的游戏所需的硬件价格昂贵。开发这些游戏的成本也非常昂贵。

    I'm not convinced VR is set to grow a whole lot. I think that the VR that we were looking forward to back in the The Lawn Mower Man / Matrix days is a long way off. All we have today is just TVs that you glue to your eyes which aren't really close to what we've been fantasizing about in sci-fi for decades.

    * Most headsets probably aren't good enough to not cause headaches after about 2 hours. I also think they could lead to eye problems.

    * Right now we only have a very limited subset of senses available. (Touch, Taste and Smell are still a long ways away from being available.)

    * The way to interface with VR is still very crude. Still uses a traditional controller or at best some Kinect like interface. Which would have the problem of needing a expensive treadmill like device to prevent you from bumping into walls.

    * The headsets are still expensive. The hardware it takes to run games capable of taking advantage of the headsets is expensive. The cost of developing those games is also crazy expensive.

    bobajeff 2021-04-11 17:15:06 view on HN
    每个人都仍然无法大规模开发软件
    Everyone is still terrible at creating software at scale
    计算很像美国城市,在该基础设施(牦牛剃须),这将让一切都更容易得到的几乎都是投资不足。

    我最喜欢的示例之一是https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsicum_(Unix) 。它是增量的,这很好。但是人们写了内核部分,并宣布任务像2003年的布什一样完成,太可笑了!必须这样做,然后彻底检查用户土地或者将这些补丁上游。如今,“用户区”已经不是init,糟糕的脚本和Gtk / Qt的集合,而是一堆库,尤其是编程语言标准库。

    这将极大地改变安全性人体工程学的面貌,因为如此多的全局状态程序员

    “容器”总是一个错误的比喻,因为软件是关于成分的,但是容器是惰性的,只有它们的质量和体积是组成的(非常粗糙)。最好考虑管道或铁路。

    另一个也许更自以为是的例子是让每个人都使用Nix(或者类似的东西。)无论是使用容器样式的虚拟全局状态,还是使用更好的Capsicum,我们都需要使其易于安装和开发整个公共空间。所有“都是在我的机器上构建的,但您可以使用它”只是导致缺乏集成,因此没有人可以帮助原始作者克服这些空白。这也将使机器变得神秘,使人们可以玩弄系统上的所有软件,这将有助于减少程序员的疏远感,从而避免了很多意外的复杂性的发生。

    但是,是的,几乎没有人以他们应有的规模来做这些事情,甚至是巨型公司也陷入了自己的技术债务中,就像只是被转移的郊区的遮阳带城市一样。 Eveyrone是“只要我的竞争对手也一样,我会吃屎并闭嘴的”思想网站。那真令人恶心。

    Computing is a lot like American cities, in the that the infrastructure (yak shaves) that would make everything easier are almost invariably under-invested.

    One of my favorite examples would https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capsicum_(Unix). It's incremental which is good. But people wrote the kernel part and declared mission accomplished like Bush in 2003, ludicrous! One has to do that and then overhaul the userland and either get those patches upstreamed. And these days "userland" isn't a collection of init, shitty scripts and Gtk/Qt, but a bunch of libraries, especially programming language standard libraries.

    This would dramatically change the security and ergonomics landscape, because so much global state programmers

    "Containers" was always the wrong metaphor because software is about composition, but containers are inert and only their mass and volume composes (very crude). Better to think about plumbing or rail.

    Another perhaps more opinionated example is getting everyone to use Nix (or fine, something like it.) Whether with container style virtual global state, or nicer capsicum, we need to make it trivial to install and develop the entire commons. All "builds on my machine but you can use it" just leads to a lack of integration so no one can help the original author smooth over the gaps. It will also allow machines to be demystified, allowing people to toy with all the software on the system, which will help reduce the programmer alienation which allows so much accidental complexity to occur in the first place.

    But yeah, almost nobody is doing these things at the scale they deserve, and even the megacorps drown in their own technical debt like sunbelt cities that are just metastasized suburbs. Eveyrone is in the "well I'll eat shit and shut up as long as my competitor is too" mind site. It's disgusting.

    Ericson2314 2021-04-10 15:06:17 view on HN
    说不应排除SARS-CoV-2的实验室泄漏假说的科学家
    Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out
    好吧,因为这将是切尔诺贝利事故以来最大的工业事故。

    这就像不在乎哪个石油钻井平台从海湾爆炸,溢出了数不清的原油桶一样-不在乎什么部件失灵,以及为什么。

    Well, because it would be the biggest industrial accident since Chernobyl.

    It would be like not caring which oil rig exploded off the Gulf, spilling untold barrels of crude — not caring about what parts failed, and why.

    gdubs 2021-04-10 04:18:54 view on HN
    餐厨垃圾占全球排放量的10%?
    Food waste responsible for 10% of global emissions?
    听起来好像要尽可能在物流链中卸下卡车,是更好的选择吗?卡车的零件和/或燃料(或原油)也将使用船用燃油进行运输。
    Sounds like removing trucks in the logistics chain as much as possible is the better option then? The trucks' parts and/or fuel (or crude) is also getting shipped using bunker oil fuel.
    shreyansj 2021-04-09 19:03:43 view on HN
    我的儿子,器官捐赠者
    My Son, the Organ Donor
    我全都是器官捐献者,但这是我们将在60年后回顾的事情,令人惊奇的是,与用患者自己的细胞培养新的器官相比,它多么复杂和粗糙。同时,对于那些被遗忘的人来说绝对是一线希望。
    I'm all for organ donation, but it's something we'll look back on in 60 years and marvel at how complicated and crude it was compared to growing new ones with the patient's own cells. In the mean time it's definitely a silver lining for those left behind.
    piyh 2021-04-09 18:45:53 view on HN

Corona Virus

    美国机构呼吁暂停强生疫苗
    US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine
    这是不诚实的。对于上述过分简化的要求,这是一个非常适当的答案。即,新旧平台之间存在差异,实验平台与新平台之间存在差异(这不是实验性的,但已经开发了很长时间)。

    您总是可以争辩说,要让速度变慢,并要延长实验时间,问题是,过去一年中有3百万人死于大流行。实际上,人们似乎认为您可以在不着急的情况下开发疫苗,但事实并非如此。其他疫苗花了几年时间有以下几个原因:

    -很久以前,科学家的知识,经验和较旧的技术要少得多。 (例如,J&J并非其中之一的mRNA疫苗,在分离和测序该病毒后约2周内就可以完成第一个候选疫苗。)-对于新病毒,它们必须从0开始(因为它们新的少等)。像是小儿麻痹症或HIV。在SARS-COV2的情况下,他们可以建立从SARS-COV1实验了很多。据我所知,早在2003年就有候选疫苗,但是到了进入第3阶段时,流行病已经结束。而且,似乎对冠状病毒疫苗的研究从未停止过,因此在2003年至2020年之间有新的结果建立了mRNA疫苗。 -一些病毒更容易开发疫苗。 (例如,艾滋病病毒不是其中之一,因为它非常擅长逃避免疫系统)-我已经提到了这一点,但是如果由于上述原因疫苗候选者没有按时准备好,那么您可能已经您需要等待数才能进行3期试验,因为不会感染任何人,因此您将无法评估其有效性。这就是2014年的埃博拉疫苗所发生的事情。现在该疫苗已经使用7年了,但是它并没有使其变得更安全,因为没有人可以接种疫苗。 (当然,您可以给它们接种疫苗,并等待任何长期的副作用,以防万一,这种副作用不会被感染,但看起来似乎不是很重要的数据点。)

    但是再说一遍:当我们确实清楚知道疫苗的最坏情况风险和疾病风险(高于疫苗最坏情况的风险)时,为什么要在这种情况下等几年?疫苗)。

    It's not dishonest. It's a very adequate answer to the over-simplifying claim above. I.e. there is a difference between a newer and an older platform and there is a difference between an experimental platform and a new platform (that's not experimental but has been in development for a long time).

    You can always argue for making things slower and experiments longer, the problem is, that there is a pandemic going on with 3M deaths in the past year. Actually people seem to think that you can develop vaccines without being rushed, but it doesn't seem to be the case. There are several reasons why other vaccines took years:

    - it was a long time ago and scientists had a lot less knowledge, experience and older technology. (Think e.g. the mRNA vaccines, which J&J is not one of, where the first candidate could be completed in something like 2 weeks after the isolation and sequencing of the virus.) - they had to start from 0 for a new virus (because they new less, etc.). Like for the polio, or HIV. In the case of SARS-CoV2, they could build a lot on the experiments from SARS-CoV1. As far as I know, there was a vaccine candidate back in 2003, but by the time it would go into phase-3, the epidemic was over. Also, it seems that research never stopped about the coronavirus vaccines, so there were new results between 2003 and 2020 that the mRNA vaccines built on. - some viruses are easier to develop a vaccine for. (E.g. the HIV is not one of them, because it's very good at evading the immune system) - I've already mentioned this, but if the vaccine candidate doesn't get ready on time because of the above reasons, then you may have to wait for years before you can do a phase3 trial because there will be no people getting infected, so you won't be able to measure the effectiveness. This is what happened with the ebola vaccine in 2014. Now the vaccine is 7 years old, but it doesn't make it any safer, because there weren't people who could be vaccinated. (Well, of course, you could vaccinate them and wait for any long term side effect, just in case, that would show up without being infected, but that doesn't seem like a very important data point.)

    But again: why would you want to wait for several years in a situation like this when we do have a pretty clear picture of both the worst case risks of the vaccines and the risks of the disease (which are higher than the worst case risks of the vaccines).

    atleta 2021-04-13 18:45:09 view on HN
    美国机构呼吁暂停强生疫苗
    US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine
    >同意,我已经使用了所有其他疫苗,但是这批药是仓促的,实验性的,对我来说不是必需的-给像我这样的人贴上“反vaxers”的标签只是不诚实,痛苦,幼稚的名字。

    不,这不对。这是对疫苗开发过程如何工作以及需要花费时间的一种误解。

    是的,在正常开发过程中需要时间来测试疫苗。具体来说,确定其有效性。花费这么长时间的原因是,一般而言,开发出大多数可以预防的疾病疫苗的情况很少,而且您不能随便让埃博拉病毒感染者检查其中有多少人感染了埃博拉病毒。

    它令人生畏,简单明了。

    您可以在网上仔细阅读大量数据,以解释如何快速完成以及为什么快速完成-这是一个示例。 [一]

    [1] https://www.immunology.org/coronavirus/connect-coronavirus-p ...

    > Agreed, I've had all other vaccines, but this batch is rushed, experimental, and not necessary for me - labelling people such as myself "anti-vaxers" is just dishonest, bitter, childish, name calling.

    No, it's not. That's a misunderstanding of how the vaccine development process works and what takes time.

    What takes time in the normal course of development is testing the vaccine, yes. Specifically, determining how effective it is. The reason that takes so long is that in general there are very, very few cases of most of the diseases vaccines are developed to prevent -- and you can't just go giving people Ebola to check how many of them catch it.

    It's fearmongering, plain and simple.

    There's mountains of data for your perusal online explaining how and why it got done fast -- here's one example. [1]

    [1] https://www.immunology.org/coronavirus/connect-coronavirus-p...

    arcticbull 2021-04-13 18:42:26 view on HN
    当您进行了完全疫苗接种后
    When You’ve Been Fully Vaccinated
    考虑到您的语气(以及所有答案都可以从本文和其他在线资源获得的事实),我怀疑您的问题是否真诚,或者回答问题的任何尝试都会被人们接受,但是这里有:

    >疫苗是否起作用

    是的[1]

    >如果已经接种疫苗,我们应该避免社交聚会,室内聚会和戴口罩的原因是什么?

    因为我们不知道COVID-19疫苗能阻止人们传播这种疾病。 (摘自文章)

    >这是否意味着我们会一直做下去直到这个帝国落日?

    不,文章的哪一部分暗示了这一点?

    [1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effective ...

    Given your tone (and the fact that all of the answers are readily available from this article and other sources online) I doubt your questions are sincere or that any attempt to answer them will be well-received, but here goes:

    > Do the vaccines work or not

    Yes [1]

    > What is the reasoning we should avoid social gathering, indoor gathering, and using mask if we already got vaccinated?

    Because we don't know how well COVID-19 vaccines keep people from spreading the disease. (from the article)

    > Does this mean we will end up doing this until this empire's sunset?

    No, what part of the article implies this?

    [1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effective...

    visviva 2021-04-13 18:09:30 view on HN
    美国机构呼吁暂停强生疫苗
    US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine
    >谁提出了这个总垃圾?

    约翰·霍普金斯大学。我不认为这通常被认为是不好的消息来源。可能有点高,或者他们正在查看不同的数据集。

    但是再说一次,即使我接受0.5%的数字,我也不能夸大其词,这仍然是很多死亡,如果美国每个人都能接受,那将是150万人。

    根据《纽约时报》 [1]的报道,约有100万人死于COVID。如果您提供的1亿感染者的数量是正确的,那么如果每个人都被感染,那将是150万的死亡人数(美国人口〜= 3 * 100M,3 * 500,000 = 1.5M)。

    [1] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-c ...

    > Who comes up with this total garbage?

    Johns Hopkins University. I don't feel like that's typically considered a bad source. Maybe it's a bit high or they're looking at different data sets.

    But again, and I cannot overstate this enough, even if I accept the 0.5% number, that's still a lot of deaths, about 1.5 million if everyone in the US gets it.

    According to the NYTimes [1], there's been about half a million deaths from COVID. If your provided number of 100M infected people is correct, then that would be consistent with 1.5M dying if everyone gets infected (US population ~= 3 * 100M, 3 * 500,000 = 1.5M).

    [1] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-c...

    tombert 2021-04-13 18:06:53 view on HN
    美国机构呼吁暂停强生疫苗
    US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine
    我当时正乘坐政府经营的地铁,他们有一条自动公告说:“即使完全接种疫苗的人也需要口和鼻子上的面膜,因为接种疫苗的人仍然可以传播冠状病毒。”这个消息一点儿也没搞糊涂。 (当然,消息本身可能是错误的,但是公共消息本身非常清楚。)
    I was just riding a government-run subway, and they had an automated announcement saying “Masks are required over the mouth and nose even for fully vaccinated people as vaccinated people can still spread coronavirus.” There was nothing muddled at all about the message. (Of course the message itself is probably wrong, but the public messaging itself is pretty clear.)
    jdavis703 2021-04-13 17:56:14 view on HN
    美国机构呼吁暂停强生疫苗
    US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine
    没错NPR在这篇文章中报告了一些接种疫苗的人死亡。 https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/04/13/9864114 ...

    >到目前为止,在美国已经有超过7400万人获得了完全疫苗接种。目前尚不清楚后来有多少人被冠状病毒感染。但是密歇根州,华盛顿州和其他州已经报告了数百起案件。大多数人只有轻度病,但有些人病得很重。有些甚至已经死亡。

    You're correct. NPR has reported some deaths in vaccinated people in this article. https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/04/13/9864114...

    >So far, more than 74 million people have gotten fully vaccinated in the United States. It's unclear how many have later gotten infected with the coronavirus anyway. But Michigan, Washington and other states have reported hundreds of cases. Most people have gotten only mildly ill, but some have gotten very sick. Some have even died.

    lefrancaiz 2021-04-13 17:43:45 view on HN
    美国机构呼吁暂停强生疫苗
    US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine
    是的,我们呢? mRNA疫苗使您的身体产生冠状病毒刺突蛋白。这就是mRNA疫苗的优点-从根本,治愈不会比疾病更糟糕,因为治愈只是疾病的一部分。这些mRNA疫苗对配子所做的任何事情也将由COVID-19本身完成(甚至更糟),因此...如果您担心长尾巴的风险,肯定会被mRNA疫苗迷住了。这也是强生疫苗,它是病毒载体,不是mRNA(Moderna / Pfizer)。
    Yes we do? The mRNA vaccines cause your body to produce the coronavirus spike protein. That is the beauty of an mRNA vaccine – the cure literally cannot be worse than the disease, because the cure is just a subset of the disease. Anything these mRNA vaccines do to your gametes would also be done (and worse) by COVID-19 itself, so... definitely get vaxxed with an mRNA vaccine if you're worried about long-tail risk. Also this is the J&J vaccine which is viral vector, not mRNA (Moderna/Pfizer).
    fastball 2021-04-13 17:38:17 view on HN
    美国机构呼吁暂停强生疫苗
    US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine
    >我认为处于“低风险”群体的人们非常热情,无法注册。

    关于那个 ...

    >在12月,我们问道:“需要接受冠状病毒感染的人群中有多少人需要住院?”

    >正确答案尚不明确,但根据最佳的可用估计,很可能在1%至5%之间,并且不可能更高或更低。我们将在附录中讨论该结论背后的数据和逻辑。

    >不到五分之一的美国成年人(18%)给出了1-5%的正确答案。许多成年人(35%)说,至少有一半的感染者需要住院。

    https://www.brookings.edu/research/how-misinformation-is-dis ...

    > I think people IN LOW RISK groups have been way too enthusiastic to sign up.

    About that...

    > In December, we asked, “What percentage of people who have been infected by the coronavirus needed to be hospitalized?”

    > The correct answer is not precisely known, but it is highly likely to be between 1% and 5% according to the best available estimates, and it is unlikely to be much higher or lower. We discuss the data and logic behind this conclusion in the appendix.

    > Less than one in five U.S. adults (18%) give a correct answer of between 1 and 5%. Many adults (35%) say that at least half of infected people need hospitalization.

    https://www.brookings.edu/research/how-misinformation-is-dis...

    Izkata 2021-04-13 17:21:57 view on HN
    US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine
    恩,jnj使用腺病毒来传递质粒DNA(1)。我只在这里指的是jnj / astra,而不是mRNA的。而且我认为我所链接的文章代表了真正的风险,这并不像我们在继续大规模疫苗接种运动之前就已经针对这种危险进行了测试,在这种运动中,即使是罕见的事件也可能成为真正的危险。

    DNA疫苗的其他危险包括产生抗DNA抗体和自身免疫反应(2)。我认为我们应该向公众传达这些危险,以便健康的个人没有风险就可以做出适当的成本风险决定,而不仅仅是说“疫苗很好”并消除担忧。

    (1) https://coronavirus.medium.com/decoding-johnson-johnsons-cov ...

    (2) https://link.springer.com/protocol/10.1007/978-1-62703-110-3 ...

    Ermm, the jnj uses an adenovirus to deliver the plasmid DNA(1). I'm only referring to the jnj/astra here not the mRNA ones. And I think that article I linked represents a real risk it's not like we've tested for this danger before going ahead with a mass vaccination campaign where even rare events can become a real danger.

    Additional dangers of DNA vaccines include production of anti-DNA antibodies and autoimmune reactions(2). I think we should be communicating these dangers to the public so that healthy individuals at no risk can make a proper benefit-risk decision, instead of just saying "vaccines good" and brushing over concerns.

    (1) https://coronavirus.medium.com/decoding-johnson-johnsons-cov...

    (2) https://link.springer.com/protocol/10.1007/978-1-62703-110-3...

    kaczordon 2021-04-13 16:57:58 view on HN
    US agencies call for pause in Johnson & Johnson vaccine
    >具有98%的存活率的病毒

    您知道,尽管去年对冠状病毒的担忧持续不断,不断提醒人们最危险的人,口罩和清洁度的高度重视,等等,这真是令人震惊。

    > a virus that has 98% survival rate

    You know, for all the continual fear mongering about coronavirus last year, the constant reminders of who was most at risk, the hyper importance put on masks and cleanliness, etc it is shocking to see things put this way now.

    kodah 2021-04-13 16:54:42 view on HN

Clickhouse