> the complexity of a problem like this, algorithmically, legally and ethically.
I disagree with the framing of this as "complexity" when it's really "Facebook's profits would be reduced/Facebook's business model would be compromised".
The complexity comes from Facebook's goal of maximising profits within the permitted algorithmic and legal space.
Given that coronavirus would not be observable until there is a cluster of symptomatic cases in a city (and a doctor with relevant experience who can observe multiple cases - here 李文亮), I find it highly unlikely that we could observe earlier cases, if they spread less rapidly or outside a city - or even within another city with less institutional knowledge.
> b) China would be highly incentivized to root out
Even if so, this doesn't form part of any prior. China being incentivized to act in that situation, doesn't affect how likely or unlikely that situation was.
> China being incentivized to act in that situation, doesn't affect how likely or unlikely that situation was.
China being incentivized to find evidence supporting the CCP's desired image absolutely does affect how likely it would be for such evidence to surface if it exists.
We see virtually no such evidence; we can assume that's not because China's lack of trying to find it; which should adjust our prior against such evidence existing at all. Yes?
My belief is simply that there is no such evidence.
Reasonably convincing evidence, to me, would be:
- genetic precursor virus particles which have died and no longer exist - they are extinct, or,
- dated blood samples with immunological evidence of infection, sufficient that it isn’t just tampered/false positives. There’s no reason to expect this would have been collected.
i.e. if you haven’t collected it by 2019, there is never going to be any evidence.
This also answers your sibling commenter: it’s not in China’s interest to publicise any such search, when the odds of discovering anything (even if there were earlier infections) are vanishingly low.
After thinking about this statement a bit, I must also admit the possibility that it did not originate in a lab yet finding evidence that it did not is still very difficult. That said, I still think that CCP's default strategy to cover up everything and shroud the truth is now hurting it more than if they were just honest and straightforward about what really happened.
The point is that even if we didn't observe such cases originally, given the incentives now, I would have expected China to investigate and surface evidence of such cases, even if circumstantial. So your second point is not a real point: the incentives don't determine the likelihood of it occurring, but they do dictate the likelihood of an investigation to determine if it did occur.
The article here also appears to significantly contradict itself.
The headline says "Food Got Wasted — Mostly at Home" but the article seems to say that this applies to "food available to consumers", i.e. it is only really measuring the quantity of waste as household vs catering/restaurants.
Since more food must surely be eaten at home than elsewhere, it's not surprising that food waste is produced at home is first out of two options.
The article later admits that a higher quantity of food is 'wasted' before it reaches stores.
I definitely waste more at home than a commercial kitchen because of economies of scale, and that overbuying by 25% is something I can afford pretty easily, but commercial kitchens can't. That said, commercial kitchens also overfeed.
The UK has already allowed open immigration from Hong Kong, specifically in response to the Chinese National Security Law, but I'm not sure that this is really any solution.
That one is only for holders of the BNO passport. The passport is only available for registration before the day of hanging over to China. That means youngsters born after 1997-07-01 or those whose parents did not apply for them are out of luck.
The genetic code itself is reasonably comparable to ASCII in complexity - every 6 bits is the code for one amino acid in a string, which will fold itself into the required protein.
Initial outbreaks of viruses occur geographically at random (with China having a >1/6 chance); the fact that there are significant UK, South African, and Brazilian variants has a much lower random component and a much higher deterministic component. It also illustrates where those variants are still primarily spreading.
If one of those variants become globally dominant, I doubt we will continue to name them after the location.
I agree with this - having watched the trailer and played the demo, Factorio looks to me like a game of managing logistics of transporting resources around, featuring a conveyor belt system that only works in 2D.
In another game, I'd consider that an annoying micromanagement feature.
On the contrary, that sounds extremely credible.
If you divide life expectancy stats just by gender and race, you already see more than 10 years difference.