mike carey

In The Atlantic I came across an article about the pandemic, how it spreads and the concept of herd immunity. It's complex, and I won't try to explain it in detail, but at the core of it is the idea that the spread of a novel virus is subject to wildly varied results as a result of very small variations in the conditions in which it's spreading. I won't try to describe the aspects of chaos theory and the butterfly effect that are used in the discussion. At the start of its spread there are variations in the transmission of the virus and the susceptibility of the people exposed to it. Things like nose hair or how loud people talk could affect it (nose hair helps filter the air people breathe—not by much—and talking more loudly projects droplets and aerosols further). These—the general differences not the two examples—mean that two separate outbreaks in broadly similar circumstances can go in radically different directions, and small interventions can be magnified in the subsequent spread of the virus. In summary the smooth graphs that appeared in some of the modelled predictions depend on homogeneity and the actual world is a heterogeneous system, and every variation has the potential to change the course of the epidemic, sometimes radically. Moving to the issue of herd immunity, the article quotes mathematicians and epidemiologists who have looked at the pandemic progression and seen that the heterogeneity of the system is likely to throw up little road blocks to the progress of the disease that can potentially disrupt its spread. In a vaccination model, everyone has the same exposure to the virus or viral protein so the result is more consistent, and that is the model from which the publicly cited herd immunity figures have been derived. In the disease path that we are seeing, the inconsistency of the way in which it develops is likely to mean that herd immunity, or more likely a stable level of disease in the population can be reached with a lower level of exposure to the disease, perhaps as low as 20%. A final point in the article is that the herd itself can influence the level at which this immunity or stability kicks in. So the things that we are doing now, distancing, masks, hand sanitising and washing, and cough and sneeze hygiene are part of what will reduce the level of exposure to the disease needed for the herd to be immune. The article is behind their paywall, but there is a free allowance and if you register you can see a few more articles per month. For those who are under their limit or who are subscribers, the full article is here. The podcast below it, which discusses the article, seems to be outside the paywall. https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/07/herd-immunity-coronavirus/614035/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=atlantic-daily-newsletter&utm_content=20200713&silverid-ref=Njc0NjY2MjkyNzExS0 https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/what-will-it-take-to-get-to-herd-immunity/id1502770015?i=1000484135770

Haha, good move, 30 degrees is a lot. Meanwhile, we had a cold front go through, half a metre of snow in the ski-fields and more expected over night in the mountains outside Canberra. It won't be all that long before our weather narratives are reversed again, but I doubt the travel narrative at this end will change.

My sister works in retail and she always talks about it when I visit her. Inventory not being there when the 'computer says yes' can be a result of shoplifters, but it can also be that customers have picked items up and put them down in the wrong place or a box of items was brought onto inventory and is sitting in the corner of a storeroom somewhere. Sometimes a team member will notice something out of place or will be able to find something that is out the back somewhere, sometimes not. What Matt says is also one of the reasons. Not everything is automated, so human error can affect the accuracy of the stock holdings.

My immediate reaction was that I'd use preventative, but when you offered this, I realised I too would say preventive maintenance. I did a quick search and the Oxford listed both with the same definition and didn't comment in the dictionary on the etymology or which was preferred, or any difference in usage. Reading further, on one of the grammar sites it noted that preventive was used slightly more often in British English but was the most common usage in American English. Now I won't be able to stop myself from thinking about it every time I go to use the word/s.

I haven't been walking nearly enough during these times, not that I did enough beforehand of course. I really should because the irregular street patterns in Canberra and the extensive off-road cycle/walking paths here mean that you rarely have your rhythm interrupted by having to stop for a road crossing. I do walk from my house to my letter box every day, though. In contrast when I had been travelling in the US, in most cities I walked extensively. From my hotel in New York, usually around the Penn Station area to Battery Point; over the Brooklyn Bridge and around that area of Brooklyn; along the High Line; and one time from 30th to 156th up the path along the Hudson. Loved walking in Central Park. I also did a couple of long walks around San Francisco when I was there. Not much walking in Palm Springs though, only from the hotel to a Ralphs to buy beers.

It is winter, and I can't imagine living in the sort of temperatures Canadians have on the prairies or even in T'ranno or Montréal. What passes for winter here, even in a cold climate area (in our terms) can be as warm as some European and North American summers.

Absolutely, but we don't yet know what the new forever, or even the new next year will look like. Domestic aviation in large (physically) countries like the US and Australia may well recover, international aviation will do so, if it does, at a different rate. I can't see travel to or from the south-west Pacific happening in the forseeable future, but I hope I'm wrong.

I recall reading that in a dom/sub relationship it should be the sub who sets the limits. That should apply to findom as much as any other variety of domination. (I also don't get the concept, but I guess it happens.)

Oh, the appalling heat! A positively tropical 15°C here today, good for July. (At midnight it's 2°.)

To restate, or complement PK's response, you are conflating two questions. 1) is the friend racist, and 2) if so, what should he do. Yes, he was looking for advice, but only on the second question, he's decided on the first. You don't need to know what the racism was to provide advice on what to do. You can offer either an unnuanced answer, for example, 'He's a friend, look past it'. or 'He's racist, dump him', or a nuanced one, such as posing hierarchy of responses depending on the severity of the racism involved. To do the latter you don't need to know where on the severity spectrum this instance lies. It's certainly easier if you can pin down the 'how racist' question and offer specific advice, but an answer that simply says that it depends how racist covers it. If you wanted to be specific in the absence of knowing exactly what had happened, you could offer a range of examples and what your reaction would be to each.

Well, I thought of piers, wharves and jetties, but the track you took didn't occur to me!

Thank you so much.

But I can't be definite about that.

And 'an'.

No, there isn't much of that. The demand isn't there as the clients can find providers legally, so they don't look on the streets from what I can tell. (And I'm not in a red-light area.) Thanks for your kind thoughts, I've worked through it, and I'm fine so far.

I couldn't agree more. That said, I think back to Chinese take-away when I was a kid, and I know that my mother loved the fact that she only had to set it out on the table rather than cook it all. It's a different world, and if I can bring home a meal I wouldn't take the time to cook, that's a bonus. It's not the same as a dining out experience, but it's still different to cooking for yourself.

@Benjamin_Nicholas, I'm reflecting on your twitter comment that certain characteristics of your online persona lead to 'a shit ton of email' from people wanting certain experiences, and wondering whether I was one of them even though I had not actually posted any comments. I think I'm traumatised. Or I could be open to that.

Some gentlemen allow the number of photos to grow. One well-regarded gentlemen was in the sixties (images, not age) but shifted most of them to semi-private. I don't judge them for that.

I surprised myself by saying double check mark rather than double tick, which is what I would call it. I must be acclimating. (That would be acclimatising.)

I'm sure the same thing is happening there, but here one of the features of the lock downs has been the number or restaurants, some very good, that are doing take-away and delivery. In the ACT they are allowed to provide wine with the take-away. I'm ashamed that I haven't taken sufficient advantage of this service as I can afford it.

It's not unique to Las Vegas or the US. There is a perception here that the police have quotas to meet, mainly for alleged traffic offences. It's not just revenue based, either, the police seem to have statistical targets that they need to meet to demonstrate that they are out enforcing the law, and also junior police demonstrating to their supervisors that they are doing so. It's messy. Thankfully, sex work is not illegal here so that's not part of it. By way of contrast, I had a burglary/home invasion a couple of months ago, and the police attended at the time. I had five officers attend the next day to ask more questions and door-knock in the area, two forensic officers turn up to see what they could find (nothing as it happened) and two detectives come out to conduct a recorded interview a few days later. They had recovered some of my property, but this was not an exercise in running up statistics.

The key thing from my perspective, and which I infer from Chris' comments above, is the insight that a former* sex worker has from that experience. If it gives them insight that is a plus, any therapist who lacks insight is likely to be unsuccessful. * I suspect a lot of sex workers have that sort of insight and bring it to the bed where they meet you, if you're open to receiving it in that setting.

Appointing an agent may be a very good idea. What the landlord will do depends on their scale (so, whether they have a lot of properties nationwide so they can afford to stiff you in one location). A smaller scale landlord may be more amenable to negotiation. And if your not in a mall, you are likely to be better off.

When you open your messages and look at the page for the provider that you contacted, if there is a small icon to the left of your message that looks like a double check mark, that indicates that he has opened it. I can't remember what the icon looks like before they do that (a sort of curved arrow, I think).

The question that @purplekow asked related to what he would or should do if he discovered that a lover was racist, it was not whether what that lover did or said was racist. It doesn't matter in the slightest whether anyone else agrees that the person was racist. If he thinks they were, whether anyone else agrees with his assessment is immaterial, he neither needs or wants someone else's assessment that, 'That's not racist.' Turning the question around from PK's friend, his question was, if you find a friend or lover is racist (in your subjective assessment), what do you do about that. The question does not ask us to assess his lover's alleged racism, it asks us what we would do if we were is a situation where we perceived a lover to be racist.