PM Boris Johnson - monster thread for a monster twat
- Thread starter ItWillNeverWork
- Start date
19force8
For the avoidance of faith
This is beyond my pay grade - in my day O level Maths didn't cover SI and imperial.
I was just pointing out what the government (who are led by the science) say it is.
equationgirl
Respect my existence or expect my resistance
But without units it's like trying to add apples and spanners.
19force8
For the avoidance of faith
Well yes and no.
Mathematically it is gibberish.
But looked at from a semiotic angle it's brutally clear:
1) We don't actually care enough to invent plausible bullshit;
2) We still have a 50% poll rating;
3) We can do this in the knowledge we won't be held to account;
4) You're fucked
brogdale
Coming to terms with late onset Anarchism
Best analysis I've yet seen of the Johnson's shitshow of a performance.
equationgirl
Respect my existence or expect my resistance
It's quite insulting really. At least put a tiny bit of effort into the bullshit.
teqniq
DisMembered
Timeline of Johnson's complete inadequacies wrt to Covid-19. When you see it laid out like that you have to wonder how on earth he in particular and the rest of the vermin in general are apparently so popular:
threadreaderapp.com
Thread by @imajsaclaimant: December 31st; China alerts WHO to new virus. January 23rd: Study reveals a third of China’s patients require intensive care. January 24th:…
Thread by @imajsaclaimant: December 31st; China alerts WHO to new virus. January 23rd: Study reveals a third of China’s patients require inteanuary 24th: Boris Johnson misses first Cobra meeting. January 29th: Boris Johnson misses second Cobra meeting. J…
threadreaderapp.com
In a word Propaganda.Timeline of Johnson's complete inadequacies wrt to Covid-19. When you see it laid out like that you have to wonder how on earth he in particular and the rest of the vermin in general are apparently so popular:
Thread by @imajsaclaimant: December 31st; China alerts WHO to new virus. January 23rd: Study reveals a third of China’s patients require intensive care. January 24th:…
Thread by @imajsaclaimant: December 31st; China alerts WHO to new virus. January 23rd: Study reveals a third of China’s patients require inteanuary 24th: Boris Johnson misses first Cobra meeting. January 29th: Boris Johnson misses second Cobra meeting. J…
maomao
普費斯
Apparently a slim
I think with regard to C19 they're getting an easy ride from a lot of people who didn't think it would amount to much themselves a few weeks ago (though of course they didn't skip five cobra meetings) As well as those who do think we should just get on with it and suck it up of whom there are plenty.Timeline of Johnson's complete inadequacies wrt to Covid-19. When you see it laid out like that you have to wonder how on earth he in particular and the rest of the vermin in general are apparently so popular:
Thread by @imajsaclaimant: December 31st; China alerts WHO to new virus. January 23rd: Study reveals a third of China’s patients require intensive care. January 24th:…
Thread by @imajsaclaimant: December 31st; China alerts WHO to new virus. January 23rd: Study reveals a third of China’s patients require inteanuary 24th: Boris Johnson misses first Cobra meeting. January 29th: Boris Johnson misses second Cobra meeting. J…
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
It kind of makes sense if there's a 'x' symbol instead of a '+'. That would indicate current level of problem combined with the rate of change of that problem. It would still be shit though cos you'd need to know both the R and Number of infections terms to make sense of the answer: eg is it 0.5 x 1,000,000 or 2 x 250,000. Two very different scenarios give the same answer: one with infections going sharply down, the other with infections going sharply up.
So no, actually thinking it through, it doesn't make sense even with a 'x'.
Plus of course we don't know 'R' or 'Number of infections'.
equationgirl
Respect my existence or expect my resistance
We do know that R should be around 1 but has been higher. Let's assume for the sake of argument it's a single digit.
The number of infections (total? Daily?) has been reported in the hundreds or thousands most of the time. So now we have this equation where we have a single digit number to a number in the hundreds or thousands. Which doesn't make any sense, as the larger number will dominate the equation.
So perhaps the number of infections is per 100,000 of population, which would make more sense, at least numerically as the numbers would be the same magnitude (or not too different).
elbows
Well-Known Member
This is what happens when words are turned into something that resembles an equation. But its a mock equation, it clearly doesnt work if you treat it like a proper equation.
The intended meaning is obviously that the alert level will be based on both R and the current number of infections, but they arent sharing the real detail with us, such as what weighting, bands or thresholds are used.
The intended meaning is obviously that the alert level will be based on both R and the current number of infections, but they arent sharing the real detail with us, such as what weighting, bands or thresholds are used.
planetgeli
There's no future in England's dreaming
Look, this is coming out of the office of a man who has just employed a doubling sequence from 1 and somehow got to 36 so I wouldn't waste too much time racking your brains over it.
equationgirl
Respect my existence or expect my resistance
You assume such details exist, of course...
Lurdan
old wave
Last edited:
elbows
Well-Known Member
I expect there are parts of the system run by detail people who can only operate with detail. But then there are the political considerations, which also form part of such decisions, and thats where it can obviously become a totally murky black box.
Although I should also point out that the detail nerds sometimes end up lacking sufficient wiggle room and nuance when it comes to what phase of alert to put things in. Here is a classic example, from NERVTAG on 21st February. They were discussing whether the Public Health England risk levels should be raised from moderate to high:
Box
app.box.com
I read that as they didnt want to raise it to high because then when it got even worse later they wouldnt have anything further to raise it to
elbows
Well-Known Member
Just finishing up my thoughts on that topic, I must remember that the nerds involved in that system have a shiny new centre and acronym.
These quotes are from todays government document about the next steps:
Anyway there is more in the document but I've quoted too much already. Pages 37 and 38 for more.
I see they want to create the impression that its independent, to help with public confidence. Time will tell, there are usually dodgy feedback loops that allow independence to be eroded, and for 'other considerations' to muddy the science.
These quotes are from todays government document about the next steps:
Anyway there is more in the document but I've quoted too much already. Pages 37 and 38 for more.
I see they want to create the impression that its independent, to help with public confidence. Time will tell, there are usually dodgy feedback loops that allow independence to be eroded, and for 'other considerations' to muddy the science.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
i think what they're saying, in summary, is more of the shame but with better pr
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Dogsauce
I’ve got Skol but I’m not a Scholar
They‘re just presenting a statement as an equation to look ‘sciencey’ and like they know what they’re doing. Might as well stick an NHS logo up there too because everyone loves the NHS. It’s pathetic.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
a thinning of the parliamentary ranks by c19 would be no bad thing
and it would answer the question of whether Johnson has acquired coronavirus immunity
Similar threads
- Poll
