|
Post by doctortomoe on Nov 16, 2020 0:06:01 GMT -5
As someone who lives in Mississippi, this was well overdue. Honestly though, I'm surprised this passed, because almost every single person on the right in this state (and there are a LOT of those) all wanted to keep the Confederate flag. At least in my area.
|
|
|
Post by Geo 🇺🇦 🌻 on Nov 16, 2020 11:10:33 GMT -5
Some more positive news in the COVID-19 vaccine front today. Moderna's study results are out and they say that their coronavirus vaccine is 94.5 percent effective. This is promising news. Of course, just like with Pfizer's vaccine, the next stages of this will be making enough doses, getting the right amount to the right place, storage, and encouraging/mandating those that are medically able to take the vaccine to do so. There are now two vaccine candidates, one from Pfizer/BioNTech and this one from Moderna. They both require two doses weeks apart. Pfizer's requires really cold storage (-70 C) while Moderna's can be preserved longer with a little less intense refrigeration at -4 C. I think until we get enough doses and enough people to take those doses, and determine the long-term efficacy of the vaccine, it's still questionable when the pandemic will wane, but at the same time, there is some optimism and a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel. The first doses will go to medical workers and other essential workers most likely. Then at least in my state, high risk individuals go next. I think I will try to get it in the high risk individual phase since I do have several risk factors that would make getting the coronavirus likely a more severe problem. Even then, I would still try to be careful since vaccines affect people differently.
|
|
|
Post by Celestial on Nov 16, 2020 12:04:28 GMT -5
Speaking of COVID vaccines, there is yet another vaccine trial going on that is showing very promising results. Developed by a Belgian company, they are currently recruiting human test subjects. It's really cool that there are multiple vaccines with different ways of working being developed. It has been a year since this virus first emerged, and medical professionals have been researching and working at breakneck pace to try to get this done. I am hopeful that the more effective vaccines we have, the better the chance of ending this pandemic. Of course, I do wonder how exactly having multiple vaccines will affect the course of the pandemic. Will it mean there are more options available and thus more people can be reached, or will this cause problems which I am not enough of an expert on to speak about? I, however, want to remain hopeful. Regardless, I'm not surprised it is being lead by Dundee University either: that place actually has a very good medical school and medical research facility. Heck, if you look at the picture of the researcher in that article, I could tell you the exact location where it is standing: entrance of said medical school. I live close to both cities mentioned in the article (Dundee is closer). So, theoretically, I could actually take part in this trial. I am seriously considering it too. I may actually be able to do something active besides staying home, mask-wearing and sanitising.
|
|
|
Post by Allison on Nov 20, 2020 20:23:25 GMT -5
So I had the opportunity today to listen to a recorded presentation and Q&A from a local doctor. He is on staff at our biggest hospital in the area, which is generally considered to be one of the best in the country, and specifically the medical school associated with the hospital is considered a top medical school, particularly in research. ... Yay run-on sentences!
Anyway, he shared some things that sound promising about COVID that I did not realize. He said that there have actually been very few mutations that have "survived" to infect people, and that none of the mutations have been able to escape immunity. So in other words, the vaccine (or immunity by actual infection with COVID) will be effective against all known mutations so far. He also said that he anticipates the vaccines will be available in limited quantities (mostly likely for healthcare workers) by the 2nd or 3rd week of December, and there will be enough for broad distribution in early spring. Somehow, it's easier to believe a local doctor who's speaking to a small group of people than it is to believe a pharmaceutical company's or politician's estimate of when the vaccine will be available.... He has nothing to gain by giving a hopeful timeline.
|
|
|
Post by Geo 🇺🇦 🌻 on Nov 23, 2020 11:22:52 GMT -5
Additional good news from AstraZeneca today. If you just look at the raw number, you might think "Oh, it's not as effective." However, there were two dosing regimens and one was much more effective than the other, and it can be stored in normal refrigeration temperatures. It doesn't need to be below freezing. That makes it cheaper and easier to distribute. AstraZeneca's vaccine uses a virus vector rather than mRNA so it has a different mechanism of action. I think that's good since it's possible that some people respond better to one mechanism vs another. I am glad there are three very effective vaccine candidates now. It makes that light at the end of the tunnel brighter and I think we can all find that promising.
|
|
|
Post by Geo 🇺🇦 🌻 on Nov 23, 2020 19:12:42 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Geo 🇺🇦 🌻 on Jan 6, 2021 8:57:50 GMT -5
If you’ve avoided US political news lately, recall that there were two Senate races in Georgia that went to a runoff as neither frontrunner in each race captured 50 percent of the vote when there were third party candidates during the November 6 general election. The runoffs were yesterday and it seems like one Democratic candidate, Rev. Raphael Warnock, has scored a victory over Kelly Loeffler, which some see as a major upset. (He will have to run again in 2022 because he takes over a seat that was appointed and has two years left on that term.) Another Democratic candidate, Jon Ossoff has a razor thin lead over incumbent David Perdue so that’s still too close to call. Democratic victories might be seen as a upset because polling hasn’t shown them as definitive front runners and incumbents are generally harder to defeat. Why is this important? Well, if these two races turn into Democratic victory, there will be a 50-50 tie in the senate for each party. When that happens, any ties in votes are broken by the VP who would be Democrat Kamala Harris. This effectively means Democratic control of both chambers in Congress and the Presidency which then gives Joe Biden the ability to implement some ideas that might have been blocked by a Republican controlled senate. It will then be interesting to see how he approaches his cabinet nominees and some progressive ideas, both which would need to go through Congress and specifically the Senate for nominees. Source: www.politico.com/news/2021/01/05/georgia-senate-race-455148
|
|
|
Post by Zoey on Jan 7, 2021 8:55:29 GMT -5
The runoffs were yesterday and it seems like one Democratic candidate, Rev. Raphael Warnock, has scored a victory over Kelly Loeffler, which some see as a major upset. (He will have to run again in 2022 because he takes over a seat that was appointed and has two years left on that term.) Another Democratic candidate, Jon Ossoff has a razor thin lead over incumbent David Perdue so that’s still too close to call. Democratic victories might be seen as a upset because polling hasn’t shown them as definitive front runners and incumbents are generally harder to defeat. This is the more important of the major US events yesterday, guys. Keep that in mind. The ramifications of the now-Democratic legislative AND executive branch are far more long-term than... the other mess.
|
|
|
Post by Gelquie on Jan 7, 2021 14:54:04 GMT -5
Yes, politically the important things happened, and the important things that are moving forward. Those are very good things to note. But I think it's also important to not dismiss what happened. (I'm going to get negative here. If you're one of those people who are already really anxious about the situation and potentially affected, you're better off not reading as this isn't really for you. But I feel I need to say it because some of the words said in attempt to help have not been helping me and have in fact been upsetting me.) What happened yesterday was a huge cultural slap in the face, and really shows how far things have gone both in terms of rule of law and politico-social atmosphere, in a way that's largely unprecedented for this country. It really shows where we are at this point, how ineffective people who are supposed to be helping us have been, how little could be done about this, and how things could've gotten, especially if maybe the mob had gotten hold of the electoral ballots that they were counting; that would've been a direct interference, as if this wasn't already for something that should be and usually is a passe procedure. (They thankfully grabbed those when the Congresspeople were escaping.)
The fact that extremist voices were given room to grow and develop to this extent is something really alarming, and something we still have to deal with, because the type of people who were part of this mob are the type of people we can be (and maybe are) neighbors with, the same people we may have conversations with, the same people fueled by heated discourse that is so common anymore. People and groups are moving from this and placing security nets as best they can to prevent something like this from happening again. And that is notable and important, and absolutely shouldn't be overlooked.
But what happened today is a litmus test of where we are, and where we could go. Whether or not it will turn out okay historically remains to be seen, as work still needs to be done on it right now, but the fact is that we're in it right now. Can the random person do something about it on that scale? Probably not. But we need to know where we are, and on our end, we at least need to know how to speak to others so that maybe we can foster conversations that don't encourage this. Work on this can be done on the individual level. "Think global, act local" is my motto, and that's how I operate. If I can be able to set an example for how to hold critical thinking and discussions without argument to at least one person, and get them to behave more rationally, then maybe that can spread to people they know, and the people those people know. And maybe that'll help at least a little bit, even if it's just one person who doesn't fall towards extremist thinking.
I'm sorry to go on like this, but I've seen attempts to soothe things with sight of the big picture, but it fails to take into account the cultural and personal effects this has, and all it does is make me even more upset. It's not time for me to move on because where I'm being asked to move on from is surrounding me, and unless the conversation starts changing to damp down the environment that would encourage such hateful rhetoric, it's going to continue to surround me. What happened was traumatizing, if not for you then for others, and trauma needs to be processed and dealt with.
Don't worry about my ability to step away, I have my work and safe social people for that. And I know how to turn off the news when I need it. But on the whole scale, I need to be able to acknowledge where I am, and to be able to talk about it.
|
|
|
Post by Geo 🇺🇦 🌻 on Jan 8, 2021 18:37:50 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Gelquie on Jan 9, 2021 1:04:42 GMT -5
That's probably a good thing, given all the problems his tweets has caused. And there have been many turn-arounds and higher-up resignations since the Capitol was stormed (I wonder if they'll give a name to that date).
Which is cool and all. But considering how the signs had been there for a long time and many people were trying to warn about it, the fact that it waited until after things metaphorically exploded like this says a lot about how we came here.
I kinda wanna apologize for the tone of my last post. I was a bit harsh in my tone because I'd been seeing a lot of messages in various places that I think were intent to show some good things happening or give perspective, but in a way that sounded to me like they were... invalidating the whole thing. When I think it's really important, and things people should talk about. Especially since we have a lot to work through to change the atmosphere that caused such a horrible event. (Particularly, I wonder if we should have a separate D&D topic on how to talk about things like this, without letting things spin out of hand but also without removing room for mental processing.) I want to be clear that it's not that other things shouldn't be brought up or aren't important, and for people who've done this, I don't mean them ill will. I'm just concerned about when words come across as invalidating of feelings that I think are highly understandable given the circumstances and context.
But I can't help but wonder if I was my own bad example by not stepping back before posting. So again, I apologize.
I think there's a huge problem with how things are being communicated in this day and age. We have Twitter for one thing, which is a platform that's highly restricted in what you can say on it, and encourages back-and-forth without nuanced discussion. Twitter threads I don't think count; those read more as soapboxes to me. Which have their place (though I personally think "just make a post somewhere"), but it's not a discussion ground to me. Then there's Facebook, which can be highly polarized, and the algorithms are made towards pigeon-holing people into places that may be more than they can handle, and finding oneself in a more extreme place. I've also noticed a trend in Facebook news comments lately, where even the more genuine-sounding comments get a comment back that may be clarifying but also assuming the worst about the other person. Which is also not good discussion ground. And then there's all the algorithm making by companies more concerned with money and popularity, and how that may be fueling the matter. It's sort of a systemic issue with the internet and social media sites, at this point.
Of course, communication problems existed before the internet. US white supremacist attacks are something with a very long, unfortunate history here. And in a way, those sort of problems can breed in any sort of social bubble, like very isolated places. The internet has kind of helped that, but now people just look for their own, which can sort of pigeonhole views. Go too far, and it's been made impossible to discuss the nuances as any well-mixed society would. But before, communication was also slower. So with slower communication comes more time to think about one's words and stance before they come to ground. The internet is wonderful for reaching out, but with how fast it's become, it's encouraged knee-jerk reactions. And I wonder if that's not doing us any favors.
The internet is here to stay, as I feel it should. It's done good things for me. But I think it's true it needs to be reworked. We've seen what happens when there's no real oversight to it. For all the call of "censorship," often it's more just putting a foot down, stifling a knee-jerk reaction before it becomes an explosion, and... well, moderating a conversation. How to moderate it all? I don't know. And can it go too far? Yeah. Stifle something small rather than talk it out, and it'll just get rooted where you can't reach it, and become something extreme. What's the balance? I don't know. I just see and am pointing out concerns.
(Is there more to the source of the issues than this? Yeah. This is just where my brain is right now. Plus, I can't begin to pick out every single one. At least not by myself.)
But anyway, I'm glad to see that places are finally starting to see the issue. I'm a little annoyed that it's come so late, and that they waited until something big happened rather than noticing the signs and the trends. But I'm glad that at least some small things are being done about it.
|
|
|
Post by Geo 🇺🇦 🌻 on Jan 9, 2021 9:23:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Geo 🇺🇦 🌻 on Jan 20, 2021 13:29:36 GMT -5
The peaceful transfer of power is complete. President Biden and Vice President Harris took their oaths. Biden’s speech was a unifying message that highlighted the challenges the US faces right now. He strongly condemned extremism and promised to be a president for all people. However, I think the best part was 22-year old youth poet laureate Amanda Gorman reciting a poem. Here she is, performing her poem “The Hill We Climb” at the inauguration: www.nbcnews.com/video/youth-poet-amanda-gorman-recites-poem-at-presidential-inauguration-99734085740
|
|
|
Post by Twillie on Jan 25, 2021 15:51:42 GMT -5
In regards to online communication and misinformation, I found an article on an interesting new feature Twitter is planning to launch. It's called Birdwatch, and it's described to be similar to Reddit and Wikipedia's moderation, wherein users would discuss and provide reliability ratings to tweets. From what I understand, tweets would be able to be flagged if believed to contain misinformation, and in a separate Birdwatch forum the topic can be discussed with fact checking and reliable information. These notes would also be rated on reliability, and users would have their own Birdwatch user rating, like Reddit. It's an interesting idea, although I have a number of wonders for this system and how it may work in practice. I suppose my biggest concern is that, since this would be a user-run fact checking system, will Twitter's precautions truly protect vulnerable users from getting dog-piled or harassed with reports and bad faith notes? Would this be a system that would stick to fact checking, or could it turn into a sort of popularity contest where what's being said can slip accountability depending on who's saying it. I wonder these things because Twitter already kind of runs on a vigilante system of accountability, wherein someone can be put in the spotlight in an instant for saying the wrong thing. And what's wrong to say depends entirely upon the Twitter crowds' opinion, which may be rooted in truth but gets very quickly misconstrued thanks to Twitter's fast-paced, minimalistic dispersion of information. I just wonder if the fact-checking system Twitter plans to implement will mesh with this culture already prevalent on the platform.
|
|
|
Post by Geo 🇺🇦 🌻 on Jan 29, 2021 9:44:36 GMT -5
So, crazy things are happening with the stock market in the US lately, some of it amusing, even if trading and investing isn't something you actively do. I'll try the best I can to explain it. So basically, you have stock for a company that's not worth much anymore, Gamestop (GME) or AMC Entertainment, INC (AMC) for example xD. Well, lots of people on Wall Street, particularly hedge funds, were betting against the stock. That means short selling. That’s the bet against a company. What you do is you borrow shares of the stock you want to short and sell them at a price X. Then you hope the stock keeps falling below price X. Then you buy back those shares at a lower price and give them back to the broker you borrowed them from. That how it’s supposed to work. When you buy the shares back, in terms of affecting the stock price, it's just like the same old buy transaction that sends a stock price up. Folks on Reddit found out that if bid the price up so that it's far above price X (recall that a year ago, GameStop was worth $4 a share), Wall Streeters betting against the stock would start to lose a ton of money. In order to cut their losses, Wall Street folks bailed out of their bets and were forced to buy back at higher than the price X which then further drives the price up. This is called the short squeeze. And last I checked, the wall street hedge funds have lost billions of dollars while those on Reddit, especially those that bought in early, have gained money. Pretty soon, some brokerage firms prevented folks from buying more stock in companies like Gamestop and AMC. This created a huge backlash because individual traders felt like the brokerage firm was trying to protect Wall Street and not them. That brings us to today where, Robinhood, one of the brokers that stopped trades of those stocks, lifted the ban today. As a result, gamestop, which closed at $190 a share last night is now double that after pre-market trading: www.cnbc.com/2021/01/28/robinhood-will-allow-limited-buying-of-restricted-securities-friday-gamestop-jumps-after-hours.htmlAs the original intent of the market was to determine how valuable a publicly-traded company is, I'm curious to see if there will be new regulations. I feel like if there are, those regulations must cut both ways where Wall Street speculators are also restricted from being reckless. Otherwise, we are just rigging it against the little guy. The SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) is reviewing the situation: www.cnbc.com/2021/01/29/sec-reviewing-recent-trading-volatility-amid-gamestop-frenzy-vows-to-protect-retail-investors.htmlIt will certainly be interesting to see this play out. Citron Research, a firm that short sells and also publishes a short sell report, has mentioned that they will no longer focus on short selling. www.cnbc.com/2021/01/29/citron-research-short-seller-caught-up-in-gamestop-squeeze-pivoting-to-finding-long-opportunities.html
|
|