JessFR
Bluelight Crew
Unless that model has been in use for like 20-30 years, that probably doesn't mean very much. Because the creation of the model could easily be biased by foreknowledge.
Covid-19 Outbreak of new SARS-like coronavirus (Covid-19)
- Thread starter S.J.B.
- Start date
- Status
Unless that model has been in use for like 20-30 years, that probably doesn't mean very much. Because the creation of the model could easily be biased by foreknowledge.
Deru
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- May 18, 2020
- Messages
- 2,802
Predicated 25 out of 27 correctly, since 1912. It gives Trump a 91% chance of winning. Otherwise I would agree, it wouldn't mean much of anything. This was the first article I could find quick on Google to reference it, so I'm not sure if it explains why it predicts so accurately by weighing something with the primaries differently than most polls.
Trump has 91% chance of winning second term, professor's model predicts
Winning candidate calculated on early presidential nominating contest and discounting opinion surveys
www.independent.co.uk
JessFR
Bluelight Crew
Predicated 25 out of 27 correctly, since 1912. It gives Trump a 91% chance of winning. Otherwise I would agree, it wouldn't mean much of anything. This was the first article I could find quick on Google to reference it, so I'm not sure if it explains why it predicts so accurately by weighing something with the primaries differently than most polls.
Trump has 91% chance of winning second term, professor's model predicts
Winning candidate calculated on early presidential nominating contest and discounting opinion surveys
It predicted 5 out of 6 of the last elections. How many it "would have" predicted before that is only useful in creating the model, not so much in judging its accuracy afterwards.
It's already about a 10% random chance that you'll successfully guess 5 out of the past 6 elections.
I'm not saying there's nothing too this model, just that in and of itself 5 out of 6 isn't that unlikely even if the model were just random.
JessFR
Bluelight Crew
Thing is, he could be telling the truth. The question is would he have developed the model in exactly the way it is now, using only what he could know in 1912.
If not, then it doesn't mean a whole lot.
There's always a way to devise an algorithm or model to correctly "predict" anything provided you're allowed to use foreknowledge of what's being predicted.
Which is perfectly fine, it's not wrong to do that, it just doesn't say much about how accurate such a model will be going forward.
Models can be very accurate, but elections are not an easy thing to model because there are so many variables involved and because the cultural framework that influences those variables isn't static.
If not, then it doesn't mean a whole lot.
There's always a way to devise an algorithm or model to correctly "predict" anything provided you're allowed to use foreknowledge of what's being predicted.
Which is perfectly fine, it's not wrong to do that, it just doesn't say much about how accurate such a model will be going forward.
Models can be very accurate, but elections are not an easy thing to model because there are so many variables involved and because the cultural framework that influences those variables isn't static.
Deru
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- May 18, 2020
- Messages
- 2,802
Yeah, there is defintely some weight to it, even if he could have made the model to coincidence with predicting the past 25 out 27, it still means something that the same model has correctly predicted 5 out of 6. Alone, yes, it would be easier to dismiss. But to have them both combined gives it more credence than otherwise, whether that means it's right about Trump this year, I don't know - but it sure makes me more hesitant about the possibility, that's for sure.
TheLoveBandit
Retired Never Was, Coulda been wannabe
Part of what I find aggravating in the current state is the push between 'back to school' and 'keep the schools closed'. It goes hand-in-hand with the 'back to work' push-block. I get how half the country is split on sitting at home getting gov't stimulus and unemployment VS get back to work and earn to support your family. I get the pull for each option. And I see how both groups (back to work more, but both can want it) would push for kids back in school, if they don't believe the virus is that bad. An opinion that is present in both groups, as is the 'keep them home and safe'.
But gov't run school systems are given guidelines on re-opening from state level gov't officials (under rough guidance from Federal, but c'mon, the states are calling the shots). The kids are caught in a bad situation. Obviously the 'back to work' group needs to send their kids to school, there's usually nobody home to watch them or help them with any online studies. The 'stay home on unemployment' group likely wants the kids out of the house (it's been a long several months), provided their virus fears don't trump the desire for some quiet. Maybe there's a bit of forward thinking to not have a generation fall further behind the world in terms of education, but I don't see that in the discussions much.
But back to the kids and school districts. Some schools are going 100% online - and most of them are ill prepared to support that. IF they had an online option available, it wasn't geared for mainstream classes, nor scalable for full classes. Usually they are used for advanced kids who don't have physical classes available at their school for the advanced work, or kids needing additional help keeping up. Not for your average kid. So, they have functioned with a focused infrastructure for maybe 10% of the school population? They don't have the teachers, materials, laptops, or cadence in place to be able to meet what an everyday school would normally provide a kid. Honor system PE classes? Emails for Q&A on homework, quizzes, exams? A zoom call for an hour every day, or every other day? They simply aren't ready to provide that.
Some schools are looking at a hybrid, say 50% home-online and 50% in brick&mortar (B&M). This is an effort to cut classroom attendence by half, allowing for more social distancing when in class, and assuming the online days can bridge the teacher contact. End of last school year proved many schools aren't even ready to offer 50% online coursework. And there is the largely unplanned expense and logistics for cleaning classrooms all the time (I understand fed gov't is working on aid to pay for this). 3rd party cleaners will make a lot of money, but the kids are in a roulette system of getting partial education, and risking getting sick (which I sincerely believe will happen*). This requires elaborate planning and oversight = kids wear masks on buses, in classes if they can't get 6', assigned seating on buses, assigned seating at lunches to provide contact tracing, perhaps one-way foot traffic in the halls. And all of this is out the window when someone gets sick, then it's back to 100% online.
*'Flatten the curve' was the mantra, and the goal was to not over whelm the hospitals. It does not mean less people will get sick, it means less would be seriously sick at any given time. The area under the curve, the total number who will get infected and die, that total is still the same it is just spread out over time. In the big picture, has that flatten curve peaked? Or is it still climbing? Looks to be a bit of both, so we are kinda treading water until the next flu season comes and the virus (and others) returns in force. The attempts to do even partial face-to-face schooling is a wishful effort that is doomed. Even if we didn't have another flu season coming, just riding out this flattened curve means people will continue to get sick for several months to come. Any attempt at partial f2f schooling will be thrown out quickly, and if started back up it will enter a cycle of start-up and quit throughout the school year.
This is a horrifically unstable way to attempt to educate children. And the strain on parents who can't stay home to help with online schooling are facing having their children unsupervised at best, uneducated and/or the expense of someone else managing the kids for them at worst. I don't have any answers, I just see a terrible situation with no real solution. I suppose, 100% online learning is the most stable path, and many online charter schools operate on the funding public b&m schools would be getting so the parents aren't out of pocket (though private schooling remains available for those that can afford it, I assume). But it still begs the question of who is watching the kids during the workday? Who is helping them with their education at home?
The whole situation sucks. I'm just a bit hung up right now asking how do we NOT lose a generation, or have them put behind the rest of the world.
But gov't run school systems are given guidelines on re-opening from state level gov't officials (under rough guidance from Federal, but c'mon, the states are calling the shots). The kids are caught in a bad situation. Obviously the 'back to work' group needs to send their kids to school, there's usually nobody home to watch them or help them with any online studies. The 'stay home on unemployment' group likely wants the kids out of the house (it's been a long several months), provided their virus fears don't trump the desire for some quiet. Maybe there's a bit of forward thinking to not have a generation fall further behind the world in terms of education, but I don't see that in the discussions much.
But back to the kids and school districts. Some schools are going 100% online - and most of them are ill prepared to support that. IF they had an online option available, it wasn't geared for mainstream classes, nor scalable for full classes. Usually they are used for advanced kids who don't have physical classes available at their school for the advanced work, or kids needing additional help keeping up. Not for your average kid. So, they have functioned with a focused infrastructure for maybe 10% of the school population? They don't have the teachers, materials, laptops, or cadence in place to be able to meet what an everyday school would normally provide a kid. Honor system PE classes? Emails for Q&A on homework, quizzes, exams? A zoom call for an hour every day, or every other day? They simply aren't ready to provide that.
Some schools are looking at a hybrid, say 50% home-online and 50% in brick&mortar (B&M). This is an effort to cut classroom attendence by half, allowing for more social distancing when in class, and assuming the online days can bridge the teacher contact. End of last school year proved many schools aren't even ready to offer 50% online coursework. And there is the largely unplanned expense and logistics for cleaning classrooms all the time (I understand fed gov't is working on aid to pay for this). 3rd party cleaners will make a lot of money, but the kids are in a roulette system of getting partial education, and risking getting sick (which I sincerely believe will happen*). This requires elaborate planning and oversight = kids wear masks on buses, in classes if they can't get 6', assigned seating on buses, assigned seating at lunches to provide contact tracing, perhaps one-way foot traffic in the halls. And all of this is out the window when someone gets sick, then it's back to 100% online.
*'Flatten the curve' was the mantra, and the goal was to not over whelm the hospitals. It does not mean less people will get sick, it means less would be seriously sick at any given time. The area under the curve, the total number who will get infected and die, that total is still the same it is just spread out over time. In the big picture, has that flatten curve peaked? Or is it still climbing? Looks to be a bit of both, so we are kinda treading water until the next flu season comes and the virus (and others) returns in force. The attempts to do even partial face-to-face schooling is a wishful effort that is doomed. Even if we didn't have another flu season coming, just riding out this flattened curve means people will continue to get sick for several months to come. Any attempt at partial f2f schooling will be thrown out quickly, and if started back up it will enter a cycle of start-up and quit throughout the school year.
This is a horrifically unstable way to attempt to educate children. And the strain on parents who can't stay home to help with online schooling are facing having their children unsupervised at best, uneducated and/or the expense of someone else managing the kids for them at worst. I don't have any answers, I just see a terrible situation with no real solution. I suppose, 100% online learning is the most stable path, and many online charter schools operate on the funding public b&m schools would be getting so the parents aren't out of pocket (though private schooling remains available for those that can afford it, I assume). But it still begs the question of who is watching the kids during the workday? Who is helping them with their education at home?
The whole situation sucks. I'm just a bit hung up right now asking how do we NOT lose a generation, or have them put behind the rest of the world.
Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
No one wants to keep the schools closed.
There's just the reality that we can't shove too many people in too small of a place without people getting sick, and the public school system is woefully unprepared to take in all the kids that it needs to.
If it was, no one would be dissuading the schools from opening, I am sure.
The "close the schools" types are DeVos and other Trump pals the public school system is a joke and a total waste of money TRUMP HIMSELF goes "it's 10%" when challenged on public education consisting of 8% of the budget.
The Republicans want to defund/close the schools. The Democrats do not.
jpgrdnr
Bluelighter
Its a huge social problem I'm guessing. Remember the Wire, in the Baltimore ghetto? Tons of welfare kids have nowhere to go but to school.
I mean if I was a parent in a large urban center I might not send my kid to school this year. Homeschooling isn't too bad.
I mean if I was a parent in a large urban center I might not send my kid to school this year. Homeschooling isn't too bad.
what do people make of this: Trump emphasizes importance of masks during WH briefing ?
if it's a reaction to the poor poll numbers on his administration's coronavirus response, seems like too little too late...
alasdair
if it's a reaction to the poor poll numbers on his administration's coronavirus response, seems like too little too late...
alasdair
TheLoveBandit
Retired Never Was, Coulda been wannabe
In part, I can follow your logic. Conservatives have long pushed school vouchers, magnet schools, choices for parents to seek out the best available education for their children. But step back and ask WHY? For the most part, it is because they see the public school system failing them, and there are ample cases of this to point to = Students in Detroit Are Suing the State Because They Weren’t Taught to Read. Or, because they view the public system as indoctrinating rather than educating, and again there are ample cases of this to point to= I [Biden] wish we taught more in our schools about the Islamic faith; and I heard a recent interview I'll link as soon as I can find it where a public social studies teacher outright states she isn't teaching the curriculum, and instead is teaching elementary kids how to not be racist and properly protest (C'mon, grade school kids? Protests?)
However, Trump is pushing for us to open schools, not close them. He's meeting with members of congress on how to financially support the re-opening of schools, not defund them. So, you're last statement about Reps is wrong, FYI.
Perhaps I'll hold off on taking this further as it is getting pretty off topic from the virus and into education.
TheLoveBandit
Retired Never Was, Coulda been wannabe
It's what, Wednesday? Today his staff is smart, the smartest, the very best in the world, so he is listening and agreeing with them. Tomorrow, he won't.
I doubt it's a public opinion thing. Yes, his ego needs stroking, but his ego also strokes itself and ignores everyone around him - wise men and fools alike.
Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
IT IS BECAUSE IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO I shouldn't have had to pay for other people having kids and other hard working people shouldn't have had to pay for my ass!
10% of the budget would mean 10% more scientific research. 10% more roads. 10% more money for parks. 10% more war on Iran, DPRK, China, Russia...
US public schools constantly perform poorly, are a never-ending seedy cot of controversies ranging from gun control to prayer in schools to institutional racism .... WHY IS MY TAX MONEY GOING TO THIS CESSPOOL OF FAILURE???
Why not public housing to aid homeless crisis (NO DOUBT VICTIMS OF THE US PUBLIC EDUCATION SYSTEM?)
It actually angers me that the right-leaning people picked up the "save the children!" mantra - it's a societal-wide flip flop of epic proportions.
Wake me when Westboro Baptist Church has signs that angrily accost heterosexuals.
Instead of just one year of public education money, the budget could be redirected for vaccines
so kids don't have to get sick, spread the virus
"the kids will recover"
what if they get their parents sick and those parents/caregivers die? then they are wards of the state?
If you really wanted to care about kids you would cancel school until a vaccine came around. Republican leaders are saying things like "KIDS WILL GET SICK AND GET OVER IT".
What happens when most of the teachers get sick, the substitute teachers? The principals? The cafeteria workers? Are you going to start having the kids work their own institution like a prison, too? You might as well, right?
![:\](https://bluelight.org/xf/BL_Images/Orig_Emoji/wrygrin.gif "wry grin :\")
I'd just cancel public school altogether for their own good but I'm sure if I did that and was president I'd be deemed "worse than Trump"
It will be a huge disaster I am sure. I understand "life has to go on", but this is shortsighted at best. Why did we close schools in spring then? Why was that acceptable? If it was "so damaging to kids"... exactly. It's OK when Republicans / the state / the stasi tells you it should be done, but when they want you to get sick or don't care how many people die which is a number that is...145,000. More Americans died from covid-19 than in the Korean War. Think about that. Around 3,000 people died from 9/11. And we went to war. Why are we letting China get away with this, moving on as normal as if nothing happened??? Trump's response to this virus has been a massive failure and disaster. According to Bolton, Trump personally tried a quid pro quo with Xi Jinping. I believe Bolton isn't lying. Any world citizen who has seen what this virus has done to their economy and nation should want retribution and China is solely responsible for this.
Re-opening schools and the economy and not having a military response is disgusting. No one cares about kids, why don't we just ship them off to the Chinese Communist Party for virus experimentation in their germ warfare labs? That's essentially what we're doing, China has just outsourced it to the whole world and we're playing along.
What happened to WAR TIME PRESIDENT TRUMP fighting the WAR on covid-19? We weren't done and he buckled under pressure and needs to get the fuck out of the way so someone else can take over. I do not trust Biden / the left for an adequate response.
Last edited:
jpgrdnr
Bluelighter
The State Department probably has run the numbers and someone was told to tell the President in his morning brief that masks were enough of a swing variable that he damn well should wear a mask because it was probably going to be a part of his agenda in some form, ie. the hospital visit.
There are tons of people in large public gatherings not wearing masks in the US, which is a guess (there was video I think). And its enough of a math equation to someone in government that wearing masks would make a difference.
Conspiratorially - maybe its hints on the shape of things to come. The beans, the masks, a NWO where we eat beans with masks on. Maybe Trump will show up like Mr. Rogers and bring a teddy bear or something to explain to me the problems of the world. I mean I'm still hoping its aliens or a meteor swarm.
There are tons of people in large public gatherings not wearing masks in the US, which is a guess (there was video I think). And its enough of a math equation to someone in government that wearing masks would make a difference.
Conspiratorially - maybe its hints on the shape of things to come. The beans, the masks, a NWO where we eat beans with masks on. Maybe Trump will show up like Mr. Rogers and bring a teddy bear or something to explain to me the problems of the world. I mean I'm still hoping its aliens or a meteor swarm.
Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
Major implications with covid-19 spread and schools as seen overseas in Israel, very relevant discussion. Why is US "fighting the disease" by encouraging and funding areas that spread the disease?
Disturbing. Lends to virus denial / science denial ironically since science is taught at school...
btw I might be coming off as salty or angry - I am only upset and disturbed with Trump and pals, I'm totally ok with everyone else here even if they want schools open, I'm just very opinionated and what not.
mal3volent
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2011
- Messages
- 40,092
I think if schools open as usual there's no question the virus will extend way into 2021. Little kids are like sponges, they may not get sick themselves but they will unknowingly infect grandma and grandpa and they very well might die.
Hylight
Bluelighter
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2019
- Messages
- 9,532
exactly, and therefore we are going to have a reset one way or another
a plague is a plague is a plague
no need to make it into a n.w.o.
or a georgia guidestone.
i'm stayin on the mountain to my place unknown for now
Captain.Heroin
Bluelight Crew
... THIS!!!
It's pretty much inexcusable to "open up the schools cuz KIDS...." when FAMILIES/PARENTS can die. Kids might lose a parent.
Read TOO MUCH AND NEVER ENOUGH by Mary Trump if you don't believe losing a parent can have a negative effect on the outcome of a child. Please.
BTW have you read it mal? I'm on chapter 2 and it's so good
Deleted member 521610
Bluelighter
this virus is going to be well into 2022 at this rate. Vaccines if they manage to actually work are still a long shot off.
I think covid-19 is going to exist forever at this rate its to out of control.
I think covid-19 is going to exist forever at this rate its to out of control.
Deru
Bluelight Crew
- Joined
- May 18, 2020
- Messages
- 2,802
Yeah, SARS-CoV-2 likely has evolved well enough to ensure it's survival on this planet for quite a while, well beyond 2022. That doesn't mean life will forever be changed because of that, once a vaccine is released things will go rapidly back to normal. We could have got there quicker had everyone just worn a damn mask, but I digress, can't change the fact that our country despises tyrannical type governments and values their rights.
- Status