COVID-19 - READ THE RULES BEFORE REPLYING

[Bombastinator]

12 minutes ago, mr moose said:

Might be time for another civil war or mass uprising.  Maybe this time everyone should aim for sustained communal goals rather than individual civil rights.

 

 

That happened between the 30’s and the 70’s

[xentropa]

Meh, move it to Mexico already.  Maybe then Teslas won't be so expensive.

[KablahGaming]

Wouldn't put it past him to move, he did build a completely new building and production line when people said he couldn't. Always seems to pull a rabbit out of his hat.

[Guest willies leg]

Here's to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They're not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can't do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.

 

[leadeater]

9 minutes ago, willies leg said:

Here's to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently. They're not fond of rules. And they have no respect for the status quo. You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them. About the only thing you can't do is ignore them. Because they change things. They push the human race forward. And while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius. Because the people who are crazy enough to think they can change the world, are the ones who do.

*Just not at the expense of human life and health

[Zodiark1593]

3 minutes ago, leadeater said:

*Just not at the expense of human life and health

^^ is thinking mere words on pieces of paper (ie, laws) can stop the determined/crazy. 

[atxcyclist]

2 hours ago, mr moose said:

Might be time for another civil war or mass uprising.  Maybe this time everyone should aim for sustained communal goals rather than individual civil rights.

 

 

Unfortunately, people don't even get motivated enough to vote in most elections here, and many of the ones that do don't research candidates further than their tagline in ads or party affiliation. Any significant number of those people getting motivated enough to work for any particular cause is unlikely, probably impossible.

[SpaceGhostC2C]

LOL. This XXI century Howard Hughes would be so sad to watch if it wasn't so entertaining

 

 

[captain_to_fire]

On 5/11/2020 at 8:10 AM, Big Nav said:

How will the population ever build up an immunity if you hide from the virus and over clean everything? Might sound good at first but in reality your making your immune system weaker. Ever notice how someone who always runs to the doctor at the 1st sign of the sniffles is always sick, and the person who doesn't rarely is. It's because our bodies are capable of defending it self, the the catch it you need to be exposed to something before your body can figure out how to counteract it.

Thank you for those questions. Before I answer each, I'd like to clarify that the immune system, medicine and the human body is not the same all throughout. Just because two people have the same stage 2 colon cancer doesn't mean they're going to have the same treatment protocol. Same with Covid-19. Just because a 75 year old man recovered from it doesn't mean millennials should be out in bars drinking and making out because the virus seems to disproportionately affects elderly than young people.

 

I would like to point out the things you got right. Exposure to a pathogen does stimulate immunologic memory, which is a general notion. But always remember that there are always exemptions to each rule and here are some from the top of my mind:

1. Inoculum size: The quantity of the pathogen sufficient to start disease. While I'm not aware just yet how much viral particles is sufficient to start disease to an individual, it varies from person to person and the milieu. Unless it's a vaccine, natural infection just to develop immunity can be more harmful than beneficial. This is not like Hepatitis A that resolves on its own without medication.
2. Drugs taken: Many people especially hypertensive individuals take ARBs and ACE inhibitors to manage their blood pressure. Transplant patients and people with autoimmune diseases take immunosuppresive drugs just to live. Those drugs make them susceptible to Covid-19. In fact, it has been observed that most of the people who are infected and died are the ones taking ARBs and ACE inhibitors because those drugs upregulate ACE2 expression in epithelial cells, thus making them susceptible.
3. Virulence of the pathogen: Some bacteria and viruses produce mild symptoms, others like Ebola and HIV produce severe symptoms. While most of the people who got infected by Covid-19 experienced mild to moderate symptoms, we cannot ignore that in many people, the mortality rate is high. While both the seasonal flu and Covid-19 can be fatal, how many people with the flu are put to ventilators? As it turns out, the SARS-Cov-2 causes more damage due to non-specific inflammation due to cytokine storms. You know what other infection causes cytokine storm? It's Ebola. Just because there are people who recovered from Ebola doesn't mean everyone should get exposed to it because the varying immune responses from each individual and the proper treatment dictates survival.
4. Immune System: This argument about the immune system is used by many to justify violating of quarantine orders and that you just let your immune system do its job. Notwithstanding the fact that for virulent pathogens including Covid-19, the immune system does more harm than good. Our body has it's soldiers and it's divided into two: innate and adaptive immune system. In order for a germ or virus succeed in making a person ill, it has to use techniques and tactics to elude the immune system, kinda like how a state-sponsored targeted attack can effectively bypass a traditional antivirus and firewall. In the case of an initial Covid-19 infection, it can deplete T cells (lymphopenia) that can lead to rapid progression of the virus. The immune system knows when it's fighting a losing battle so it activates a cytokine storm: a phenomenon when Helper T cells overproduce inflammatory substances called cytokines. In a mild infection, those cytokines are beneficial in fighting the virus but in a severe infection, it causes hypotension, increased activation of coagulation and those can lead to multi-organ failure. You rarely see that to someone with just a flu. Also, even if a person can develop immunity from a natural Covid-19 infection, he/she might be too weak after that and become susceptible to secondary bacterial infections. Just like most flu deaths, they die from secondary bacterial infections but for Covid-19, it's worse than flu complications.

I hope this helps.

Edited May 13, 2020 by captain_to_fire

[Brooksie359]

10 hours ago, descendency said:

Agreed. This isn't about jobs. It's about taxes. The factory won't move (they can't afford to lose the production capacity). The HQ might. Even that isn't that simple, as Silicon Valley is a HUGE market for employing tech workers that Tesla needs. 

 

Honestly, this comes off as another whiney Elon Musk rant. For as much as I like what he is achieving - I really hate his shitty attitude. 

I don't think what he is saying is unreasonable though. I mean it is up for debate if forcefully shutting down their operations is really in the better interest of everyone. I mean I personally think forcing everyone to shelter in place rather than those that choose to seems a bit authoritarian to some extent. I feel like people should have the right to take the risk of continuing their daily life or not. It should be a choice. That being said I understand if people disagree with my opinion. Anyways I feel like this is not really him having a shitty attitude but rather caring about his company and his employees because unfortunately if they force production to stop that means alot of people out of jobs. 

[leadeater]

10 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I don't think what he is saying is unreasonable though. I mean it is up for debate if forcefully shutting down their operations is really in the better interest of everyone. I mean I personally think forcing everyone to shelter in place rather than those that choose to seems a bit authoritarian to some extent. I feel like people should have the right to take the risk of continuing their daily life or not. It should be a choice. That being said I understand if people disagree with my opinion. Anyways I feel like this is not really him having a shitty attitude but rather caring about his company and his employees because unfortunately if they force production to stop that means alot of people out of jobs. 

When it comes to his kind of business I can get the point about arguing to open up, the manufacturing side is highly automated and health mitigation for workers are not that hard. For the office workers I'm sure many could still work from home and also have some kind of roster or come in to work as required etc.

 

But yea his attitude sucks ass. Sympathy for his workers just not him.

[Taf the Ghost]

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

When it comes to his kind of business I can get the point about arguing to open up, the manufacturing side is highly automated and health mitigation for workers are not that hard. For the office workers I'm sure many could still work from home and also have some kind of roster or come in to work as required etc.

 

But yea his attitude sucks ass. Sympathy for his workers just not him.

The thing with Musk that most don't get is he doesn't really say much on Twitter until the point he's already set things up. Half of it is just the PR Vehicle, while the other part is him clowning on people. He uses it as a feedback loop, so people don't get when he's just doing PR work.

 

As a result, there's little reason to keep Tesla HQ in CA. The hostility to anyone being productive is a constant there, but by moving the HQ they'll put enough pressure that CA will change the calculus on the manufacturing. Most of Tesla's cars go to CA buyers anyway, so moving the car making is unlikely. 

 

It should be noted that Tesla is a world-class battery maker that also produces some cars. That's the way they operate, so keep that in mind for whatever Musk is saying.

[leadeater]

14 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

It should be noted that Tesla is a world-class battery maker that also produces some cars. That's the way they operate, so keep that in mind for whatever Musk is saying.

Well as far as the battery making side goes that's really just a tight partnership and all that actual R&D and technology isn't coming from Tesla, Tesla however back that partnership with massive production facilities to actually make them. All of this is mostly in Nevada anyway.

[leadeater]

17 minutes ago, Taf the Ghost said:

The thing with Musk that most don't get is he doesn't really say much on Twitter until the point he's already set things up. Half of it is just the PR Vehicle, while the other part is him clowning on people. He uses it as a feedback loop, so people don't get when he's just doing PR work.

Doesn't change that is is being an ass and his attitude sucks, tie a bow on it and call it PR it's still terrible, no matter the bow tied on it. His remarks clearly shows he doesn't give a damn about public health and safety and take no consideration at all for those who job it actually is. So while I think his factories should open he is a risk to public health and safety so if I were having to make the decision about letting his business open would I actually think he would instigate proper measures to keep things safe?

 

Wouldn't be surprised that his factories would be open sooner if he wasn't being such a selfish ass.

[Sauron]

42 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

I mean I personally think forcing everyone to shelter in place rather than those that choose to seems a bit authoritarian to some extent. I feel like people should have the right to take the risk of continuing their daily life or not. It should be a choice.

Except it doesn't just affect you. If you get sick you clog up the healthcare system and you risk getting a lot of other people sick, too. There's nothing authoritarian here, it's just a sensible precaution. Just like drunk driving, it's disallowed not because you'll hurt yourself but because you'll probably end up hurting other people too.

 

There are much more complex ramifications than just "you'll spread the disease", too. If some people are willing to keep working at risk of their own life then those who aren't will be pressured into doing it anyway under threat of being fired. Just like during a strike, people "choosing" to work regardless place their coworkers in a bad position.

 

There should be social safety nets in place for people who will just lose their jobs if they can't go in to work, not a "choice" between risking their life or losing their livelihood.

[Spotty]

Moved to Off-Topic.
A car manufacturer complaining about local laws and Government orders relating to COVID-19 on twitter is not Tech News.

[Tech_Dreamer]

i think he should move it to some place where it's more efficient & low costing + less state tax to operate on more profit or what not, it'll only be beneficial for him in the long run & even on short & the state would lose a value asset plus a solid job & value providing company.

 

[Brooksie359]

42 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Except it doesn't just affect you. If you get sick you clog up the healthcare system and you risk getting a lot of other people sick, too. There's nothing authoritarian here, it's just a sensible precaution. Just like drunk driving, it's disallowed not because you'll hurt yourself but because you'll probably end up hurting other people too.

 

There are much more complex ramifications than just "you'll spread the disease", too. If some people are willing to keep working at risk of their own life then those who aren't will be pressured into doing it anyway under threat of being fired. Just like during a strike, people "choosing" to work regardless place their coworkers in a bad position.

 

There should be social safety nets in place for people who will just lose their jobs if they can't go in to work, not a "choice" between risking their life or losing their livelihood.

In the same vain I guess people should stop working during the normal flu season because it helps spread the illness. The normal flu kills alot of people each year as well but we still do that. Driving in general kills a whole heck of alot of people each year as well but we still drive. Also I am unsure if you are aware but alot of people who don't have the ability to go to work because of the shelter in place order simply don't have a job anymore so I think the whole idea about people being fired because people are allowed to work again seems kinda pointless. It not like people are wanting to continue working with the risk of getting sick because they feel like it but rather because not being able to work is a real problem.

[Sauron]

5 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

In the same vain I guess people should stop working during the normal flu season because it helps spread the illness.

No, because the seasonal flu doesn't overwhelm the healthcare system and it has a significantly lower death rate.

6 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Driving in general kills a whole heck of alot of people each year as well but we still drive.

But drunk driving increases the chance of killing someone by a few orders of magnitude.

7 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

Also I am unsure if you are aware but alot of people who don't have the ability to go to work because of the shelter in place order simply don't have a job anymore so I think the whole idea about people being fired because people are allowed to work again seems kinda pointless.

Which is why, as I said, the "choice" you propose wouldn't really be a choice at all. It would just be sacrificing the lives of the poor and unemployed.

8 minutes ago, Brooksie359 said:

It not like people are wanting to continue working with the risk of getting sick because they feel like it but rather because not being able to work is a real problem.

As I said, there should be safety nets from the government that don't involve risking your life and the lives of others in order to go to work.

[foldingNoob]

I have worked in manufacturing and I would move to a place that has affordable housing and a good sea port. California is prob the most undesirable place to mass produce cars. I would also look for a cooler climate. Michigan was not a bad choice back in the day except it was quite far from the sea. I'm thinking move to vermont or maine.

[xentropa]

20 minutes ago, Sauron said:

No, because the seasonal flu doesn't overwhelm the healthcare system and it has a significantly lower death rate.

 

This plus we do have shots and vaccines for the flu.  Although not everyone chooses to get them.

[Morgan MLGman]

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

No, because the seasonal flu doesn't overwhelm the healthcare system and it has a significantly lower death rate.

That's not true. At least we don't know if it is.

We don't know the exact death rate because we don't know the scale of asymptomatic spread. Some US Counties in randomized antibody testing recently had even up to 10% of tested showing signs of covid-19 antibodies. If we account for that, the death rate is actually lower than the common flu.

The point is - we don't know that yet, and you stated it like a fact.

[Sauron]

10 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

That's not true. At least we don't know if it is.

We don't know the exact death rate because we don't know the scale of asymptomatic spread. Some US Counties in randomized antibody testing recently had even up to 10% of tested showing signs of covid-19 antibodies. If we account for that, the death rate is actually lower than the common flu.

Either the death rate is higher or the actual spread of the disease is much, much higher - in both cases covid-19 is significantly more dangerous than the flu.

11 minutes ago, Morgan MLGman said:

The point is - we don't know that yet, and you stated it like a fact.

The more important part of that statement was the overwhelming of the healthcare system, which we do know for a fact is a thing and has already happened in some countries.

[Morgan MLGman]

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

Either the death rate is higher or the actual spread of the disease is much, much higher - in both cases covid-19 is significantly more dangerous than the flu.

I agree fully - luckily it doesn't affect children nearly as much as the flu.

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

The more important part of that statement was the overwhelming of the healthcare system, which we do know for a fact is a thing and has already happened in some countries.

Honestly besides Italy and Spain, healthcare systems weren't overwhelmed at all because of this disease - and truth be told what happened in those two countries was mostly due to a bad initial response to the virus by the people governing. Add pretty much open borders to that, and here we are...
 

USA has the highest amount of infected by far and the hospitals held their own during the peak, and actually had a lot of beds & ventilators to spare in pretty much every state.

[Bombastinator]

Ran into another article discussing the way covid attacks the body.  A lot of these people who aren’t killed may be badly damaged in other ways.  apparently it attacks a lot more than just the lungs.  

I’m getting more and more worried about this restriction lifting that is going on.  i had hoped to get less and less.

 

the bad bad news about this thing just keeps on coming.  Makes it very hard to plan ahead.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/05/10/coronavirus-attacks-body-symptoms/?arc404=true