Page 29 of 60 FirstFirst ... 1925262728293031323339 ... LastLast
Results 281 to 290 of 596
  1. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West of the Pecos
    Posts
    2,414
    Default
    Does anybody know how to get a viral campaign going? My wife and I expect we will be getting the stimulus check. We don't need it. We'll pass it on to an appropriate organization. I suspect there's a lot of us out there that will do the same. But I'd like to encourage others that may not be needy. I have no skills in this regard. Does anybody know someone that can kick off a campaign to get the stimulus checks to where they will be most needed? Any national network connections out there? Can we get the word out on the morning shows, talk shows, etc?


    1 out of 1 members found this post helpful.
     

  2. Collapse Details
    Rockin the Boat
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Los Angeles CA
    Posts
    2,933
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul F View Post
    Does anybody know how to get a viral campaign going? My wife and I expect we will be getting the stimulus check. We don't need it. We'll pass it on to an appropriate organization. I suspect there's a lot of us out there that will do the same. But I'd like to encourage others that may not be needy. I have no skills in this regard. Does anybody know someone that can kick off a campaign to get the stimulus checks to where they will be most needed? Any national network connections out there? Can we get the word out on the morning shows, talk shows, etc?
    Good initiative. That said, companies are way ahead of you already - they simply will dock the pay of those who receive the stimulus by that amount, so you get that much less pay, basically the companies pocket the stimulus money for themselves:

    Texas company looking to dock stimulus money from paychecks, relieve their payroll: report


    See? No need to worry about if you need the stimulus money - poof! Taken care of!


     

  3. Collapse Details
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    386
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul F View Post
    Does anybody know how to get a viral campaign going? My wife and I expect we will be getting the stimulus check. We don't need it. We'll pass it on to an appropriate organization. I suspect there's a lot of us out there that will do the same. But I'd like to encourage others that may not be needy. I have no skills in this regard. Does anybody know someone that can kick off a campaign to get the stimulus checks to where they will be most needed? Any national network connections out there? Can we get the word out on the morning shows, talk shows, etc?
    Not sure, but this guy on Twitter (a journalist) is involved with a GoFundMe for out-of-work hourly/tipped workers: https://twitter.com/yashar/status/12...215896576?s=09

    Scroll down to the 2nd post in the thread and you'll see the GoFundMe link.

    I see a lot of posts about it. Might be a good thing to contribute to, or maybe he can help you start a new initiative. It seems like he reads most of the messages he gets, and he knows a lot more about viral social media campaigns than I do.


     

  4. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Run&Gun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    4,226
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by OldCorpse View Post
    Good initiative. That said, companies are way ahead of you already - they simply will dock the pay of those who receive the stimulus by that amount, so you get that much less pay, basically the companies pocket the stimulus money for themselves:

    Texas company looking to dock stimulus money from paychecks, relieve their payroll: report


    See? No need to worry about if you need the stimulus money - poof! Taken care of!
    I see some serious backlash coming...


     

  5. Collapse Details
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Batutta View Post
    What's distressing to me, is that as more stats are reported worldwide, the fatality rate is creeping up. I would expect that to go down with more numbers, if the real fatality rate is much lower.
    Well, see, that's the problem right there. Unless you know how many are infected, you can't possibly know the fatality rate. Without knowing the # of asymptomatic or mild cases, you don't know what to divide to generate a rate.

    Initial projections were that the COVID-19 would spread to infect up to 70% of humanity (up to 5.5 billion people). Of course, initial projections rarely bear any relationship to reality. But if we assume that 70% of any given population will be infected, then we can use the given death count to calculate a projected rate. And if the 70% are already infected, then yes, each day that goes by will drive the death rate number higher, because the # of infected people will be at a generally static rate.

    The problem is, without widespread testing, we have no actual idea of how many people have been infected, and without knowing that, it's impossible to accurately derive a fatality rate. If you furthermore then compound it with the question of strongly disparate government reporting rates of infection (Germany vs Italy, for example, or the suspected artificially low numbers coming from China and Russia) then -- I don't think we're at a point where we can even conduct an accurate sampling of a subset of a given population.

    Finally, the death rate is going to be strongly affected by the status of the available medical care in any given country. If the hospital is overwhelmed, lots of folks are going to die who maybe might not have in another area. The fatality rate of the virus is, therefore, directly related to our behavior towards it. If we all go to Spring Break and Mardi Gras, and then overwhelm the medical capacity, the fatality rate of the coronavirus will be higher, perhaps dramatically higher, than it would be if we all kept to social distancing.

    Here's an example: the mayor of Houston just got on TV and told us the current numbers he has, which were 232 cases. Interestingly to me, the majority of those cases were for people aged 0-49. If I remember the numbers properly, those 80+ accounted for only about 4% of the cases, the same percentage as those 0-19. But wait -- aren't the 80+ the highest risk group? If so, why so few cases in that high risk group? Because (IMO) those 80+ are the ones who are most aggressively quarantining themselves off! And if those people don't get sick in the first place, then the overall fatality rate of the virus goes down, because it will then be primarily affecting those with stronger immune systems who may stand a better chance of fighting it off.

    Which is all to say -- there is no "fatality rate" that can be associated with the virus. We can't predict how many people will die from it, because our own behavior changes the likelihood of us getting it, which in turn changes the likelihood of the most susceptible getting it, and also changes the likelihood of the hospitals being overwhelmed, which gives everyone who DOES get it a better chance of surviving it.

    The numbers really are like the time travel paradox -- if you know what's going to happen, and you then change your behavior to avoid it happening, did you just avoid the bad thing? Or was the fact you knew about it, and took action, the exact thing that caused the dreaded event to happen in the first place? We're in the same place with this virus -- knowing about it is changing our behavior to it, which is directly affecting its ability to infect us and our ability to respond to it, which is all directly affecting the total number of deaths that will be attributed to it.

    Which is one of those sick situations, because the more aggressively we fight it, once we come out the other side, the more people that will be saying "what? That wasn't so bad at all, everyone overreacted, we never needed to implement all these restrictions in the first place." Sigh.
    Last edited by Barry_Green; 03-30-2020 at 01:44 PM.


    3 out of 3 members found this post helpful.
     

  6. Collapse Details
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    386
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Batutta View Post
    Yeah, but, in the absence of that, it's the best way to guess, more so as the numbers get larger, which was my point. You can only guess on what is known, not what is unknown. What's distressing to me, is that as more stats are reported worldwide, the fatality rate is creeping up. I would expect that to go down with more numbers, if the real fatality rate is much lower.
    But if everyone is overestimating the mortality rate, what use is a larger sample size? Why not look at the most accurate data only, which would probably be from Germany, Iceland or South Korea based on having the highest testing frequency? (Or a pool of those 3.)


     

  7. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West of the Pecos
    Posts
    2,414
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by ahalpert View Post
    Not sure, but this guy on Twitter (a journalist) is involved with a GoFundMe for out-of-work hourly/tipped workers: https://twitter.com/yashar/status/12...215896576?s=09

    Scroll down to the 2nd post in the thread and you'll see the GoFundMe link.

    I see a lot of posts about it. Might be a good thing to contribute to, or maybe he can help you start a new initiative. It seems like he reads most of the messages he gets, and he knows a lot more about viral social media campaigns than I do.
    GoFundMe is ripe with fraud opportunities. I will send my money to a legit local organization.


     

  8. Collapse Details
    Senior Member ahalpert's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    386
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul F View Post
    GoFundMe is ripe with fraud opportunities. I will send my money to a legit local organization.
    That's understandable - I assure you I'm not trying to defraud you! I saw his campaign signal boosted by Ben Affleck, which I thought indicated his ability to reach a large audience. Maybe he could give your initiative a signal boost anyway: https://twitter.com/BenAffleck/statu...181510144?s=09


     

  9. Collapse Details
    Senior Member Batutta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Planet 10
    Posts
    7,511
    Default
    Quote Originally Posted by ahalpert View Post
    But if everyone is overestimating the mortality rate, what use is a larger sample size? Why not look at the most accurate data only, which would probably be from Germany, Iceland or South Korea based on having the highest testing frequency? (Or a pool of those 3.)
    I guess we'll only know in like, 18 months, when this is all over for real. Reminds of the AVID render time calculator on old machines, that kept going down as the render completed and only gave you an accurate time when it was finished rendering.
    "Money doesn't make films...You just do it and take the initiative." - Werner Herzog


    1 out of 2 members found this post helpful.
     

  10. Collapse Details
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Long Island
    Posts
    6,914
    Default
    Some more information for your overall consideration (and evaluation & education):

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/suspected...144526820.html


     

Page 29 of 60 FirstFirst ... 1925262728293031323339 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •