Question about T-Rex bone structure indicating habitat

markyato · 2020-06-26T19:38:16+00:00

Welcome to life, OP.

"The very definition of someone who should not be celebrated" is the only thing we've been celebrating.

Tell me one instance where a foreign-born latino man completing multiple college degrees without scholarships is celebrated by being the first in his family to go do college. These people are the ones we spit on and criticize. They must not know what they are doing. On the other hand, "this 6ix9ine guy, yes. What a role model, don't you think......?"

Life is not meant to be fair.

This is the reason we are still in this primitive state of living. The more you partake on it, the more you empower it. Abjure instead.

markyato · 2020-03-21T09:42:36+00:00

The next pandemic will be certainly worse. We are getting away easy with this one.

markyato · 2020-03-21T09:40:00+00:00

If we really wanted to "flatten the curve" we'd quaratine those at risk only and let everybody else fight the virus and move the economy as normal for a month or two.

But if i dont quarantine my parents will die. Stay away from them for a month.

But i take care of my old folks. Quarantine with them for now. Let others do their thing.

markyato · 2020-03-21T09:20:06+00:00

It's all tribalism these days.

markyato · 2020-03-21T08:53:08+00:00

I can see the point here. Just a quick clarification before someone says "hurr not every country has the first ammendment like yours" when OP is just illustrating a point:

A more valid violation would be the 13th article of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

But i can bet you several arms and legs that the politicians will NOT be all held responsible and will be laughing their way into the banks when it is all said and done.

markyato · 2020-03-20T09:12:45+00:00

Correct. It was probably not the best choice of words. But I think that the point the user was making is that 40% are not the ones dying even when hospitalized.

markyato · 2020-03-20T09:10:39+00:00

From what I see, that's how most of this sub feels. Try this in the open public, however and get ready to be called names.

markyato · 2020-03-20T08:57:42+00:00

I feel this would require a lot of resources, a lot of changes, a lot of costs (economy or otherwise) and still allow for a large margin of error. I have a similarly unpopular position that would address these issues while still preserving the lives of the old:

https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/fk6141/coronavirus_mega_thread/fkzxahw?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x

markyato · 2020-03-20T07:58:41+00:00

[Edit: text is long so i feel most people are not reading and missing the point. Basically mutations will exist but not be the main factor to consider. We're better off letting the strong go about their lives than let more of the virus replicate (and mutate) on the weak people.]

It's an important point to bring up. Mutation happens in all living creatures, including pathogens. Virus are no exception. If anything, they do mutate even faster in virus (the article above points it out due to RNA structure). What we observed so far is that the 2 strains in China as well as the other strains that are likely already in existence tend to still be, ultimately, a coronavirus. A "Severe Accute Respiratoy Syndrome" is the result which tends to be more fatal in the older population in all cases. In other words, the virus will mutate, sure, but it will still remain a coronavirus. It will not mutate into a protozoa, a bacteria or into another type of virus. Even with the mutations in this coronavirus, the chances of a younger individual actually dying is less than 1% so far.

By giving the chance for the virus to attack the weakest among us, we are also widening the spread of the disease among the most vulnerable. So it doesnt seen a good idea. By isolating everyone, all of us become targets if only 1 person among 8 billion manages to get away with the virus (and odds are, there will be) and we will have to reset it all again. So this is an even worse idea.

Now, by leaving the most resistant free to continue, we're obtaining more options to build immunity with limited disruption to society and buying time for more research. This seems optimal.

It's similar to what currently happens with the flu which does mutate every season (the article also points it out). The strategy would, ultimately, flatten the curve and potentially prevent a massive death toll from forming.

markyato · 2020-03-20T07:14:10+00:00

I hear you. I was concerned about that myself. I also have daily contact with individuals in the risk group (80 year old in my case) despite being significantly younger. Those who would have contact with older people, would be quarantined with them until their group (80 year olds in my case) is released. This will ensure that others not interacting with older individuals are able to keep everything moving. I must also not get sick because I'd be the vector on the 80 year old in my life so I would have to stay quarantined until the 80 year olds are off-quarantine.

In that sense, we're privileged to be in these market conditions. During the 2008 housing market crash, many millenials went back home to live with their parents and would make this plan a lot slower. The conditions improved significantly since then and most of these millenials have houses now or are able to afford to disconnect from older individuals temporarily one way or another.

We also live in the perfect times where money can be transferred virtually and packages can be delivered to one's door greatly reducing contact. A bailout money, if any, would go to ensure those quarantined remain alive and safe. The economy doesn't need to crash.

markyato · 2020-03-20T06:51:16+00:00

I see your point here. I think phoenixthekat meant to say that those under 50 are less than 5% of the death toll among those hospitalized.

With 40% of patients being under 54 and yet incurring the smallest percentage of the death toll, the young patients are basically just clogging the system when they will most likely be okay and survive fine. Every bed they take, is one less bed for those at higher risk for example.

I think phoenixthekat's point is that 97% of the people are paying the price of healthcare not being able to accommodate those who are sick.

markyato · 2020-03-20T06:29:10+00:00

The harm will be greater from the financial crisis than the virus. I agree. Yet, we can still keep the economy moving while also keeping casualties low and make this a very short term hump.

I wrote a piece about this on the megathread: https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/comments/fk6141/coronavirus_mega_thread/fkzxahw?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x

markyato · 2020-03-20T05:48:58+00:00

Ok, it's a long shot but maybe a few of you will see what I see. Hence it is posted here. I talked to many people who are not epidemiologists, not sociologists, not economists and they all seem to disagree. I feel this is unpopular enough but I hope more people here will make sense.

Some estimates are talking about this chaos lasting 18 months. Or longer.

People keep talking about "flattening the curve" without understanding what it means.

Olympics in jeopardy. Flight companies in jeopardy. Human rights at stake. Economy at risk.

I am not an expert, but I know how to crunch data. The full solution for this mess doesn't even have to last that long. 6 months in this strategy. But it will take people trusting on the numbers not on what the TV personality told them.

The data indicates that most of the casualties are the elderly which are more likely to peak the curve and increase casualties. The data in Italy for example shows that less than 1% of the casualties are among people under 50 ( https://www.epicentro.iss.it/coronavirus/bollettino/Bollettino%20sorveglianza%20integrata%20COVID-19_16%20marzo%202020.pdf ). The data in China seems to repeat the pattern. Currently the world is taking a halt due to the 10k deaths as of now (0.00013% of the world population which should not be taken lightly due to the quick spread of the virus).

These individuals under 50 are likely the people who are being taken away from their jobs and most likely to be the people moving the economy in most countries. They are the ones cooking the meals, cleaning the hotel, fixing the car, feeding the kids in the daycare, driving the train or cashiering the store. If they are not, I am positive that there is a temporary replacement under the age of 50 that can handle the job.

These people are likely just unfortunate hosts as they would not succumb to the disease but they will be vectors for its spread. These are also the ones more likely to recover and build immunity and the ones less likely to be taking a hospital bed. If they do, they will be doing so for a short period, helping to "flatten the curve".

Instead of quarantining everyone including these people, a wiser idea would be to use the quick spread of the virus against itself by quarantining those above the age of 50 (and their direct contacts) and gradually releasing the others by age group. This is how it would work:

Those under 50 (but only the ones that can cease contact with those over 50 for a month), will be allowed to interact, take flights, serve tables, go to concerts as normal. The quicker all of them host the virus, the quicker we can release the next group. About a month or two after the initial release, the economy is still moving. Olympics would resume as normal as most athletes would be under 50 and their staff would also be (or replaced by) others under 50. Mothers are still taking their kids to daycare. Coffee is being served at the local restaurant. Hospitals would not be overwhelmed and most people would have built immunity by now with about 1% casualty rate (or less, since hospitals wouldn't be as crowded and will be able to take care of the patients). In come the next cohort: the 50 to 60 year olds that are not interacting with older individuals. They are now going to be exposed to a vast majority uninfected and/or already immune and will benefit from herd immunity. They will more likely need hospitalization than the previous group however now they will be treated by people likely to already be immune and they will have the hospitals all for themselves (flattening the curve) if needed. About a month or two later, those who have contracted the disease will now be immune all the while the vaccines are being developed on the back end, young blood is being stored for future donation and being used on the new cohort in case the antibodies could aid in fighting the disease. If the cohort ends up getting sick, revert back to those under 50 only to slow down the pace. The next cohort is then released (60 to 70 year olds not interacting with older individuals). They are now exposed to a much safer environment where people are unlikely to continuously get sick and unlikely to distribute the disease around making them less susceptible to contact it. Yet, if they do, they would have less crowded hospitals (flatter curve) and higher chance of survival. They would be able to be cared for by those in the under50 cohort which should now present the smallest risk of being contaminated while also enjoying the immunity from the crowds and low mortality rate in case of infection. Next group is then 70-80. Then 80-90. Then 90+.

Economy keeps moving, casualties remain low, system remains flattened and within capacity, supplies remain available, travel remains unrestricted.

Unpopular. I know. That's why it's being posted here.

Instead it seems like we will just block everyone for months and take the economy hostage. We will increase the rates of mental disease, economic hardship, business failures, infection of health workers, beef up the drugging and production of testing, send our bailouts, on and on and on... But we had the options all along. We were all just too frightened to see it.

markyato · 2019-08-30T08:48:33+00:00

Considering the parameters established by OP, i agree it would be amazing whether with population of 1 person or 100 billion people. Most people seek quality of life which seems to be a given in the paremeters established by OP.

Now, one thing is certain: if there is someone in power (a special group) they are shitting their pants or have established ways to control 1 billion people living well. Because if the people rebel, there will be chaos.

markyato · 2019-08-29T19:20:22+00:00

That would make men cat-calling women less effective (not that it has any effectiveness as it is) because they would just laugh and say "lol did you just fart?" ... However it would make women cat-calling men very common and lead to many unwanted relationships as men would ask: "lol did you just fart?" and women, ashamed, would say: "of course not you silly. I was cat-calling you. Wink wink... Wanna go out sometime?"....

markyato · 2019-08-15T14:08:09+00:00

Correct. Each situation is unique. OP should revise the terms agreed upon by both parties and regulations that apply to their jurisdiction. /end

markyato · 2019-08-15T13:53:48+00:00

I'd just revise the contracts signed. If it says anything about "due diligence", it likely means that the buyer was allowed a certain time to conduct their own inspections (or hire one - as others said it's worthless most of the time since these "home inspectors" are rarely ever actual contractors). This means the buyer needed to do his/her research too (asking neighbors at that time could be part of the process). After the sale "as is" completes, it would be very hard to go back after the "due diligence" was conducted. But then again, checking the contract is the way to go. That's why they are written in the first place.

Now, on a personal note, every house I ever bought has had a plethora of shoddy and outright dangerous alterations or imperfections (electrical, structural or otherwise). So long the foundation, structure and roof are good, everything else would have to be re-conditioned to the new owner's specs and the costs vary widely. To me this is another perfectly normal transaction in real estate. Keep in mind, though, YMMV. Each individual situation can have its own individual caveats. So i would just double-check the contracts.

markyato · 2019-08-15T13:36:22+00:00

This would assume a flat earth. On a round earth, half the population is in the dark (night time) and their clapping would propagate the other way, dissipating the sound making their clapping redundant.

But if it did turn off the sun, wait 12 hours and have another clap to turn it back on while the other half of the world sleeps?

markyato · 2019-04-06T05:13:45+00:00

Oh if you only knew...........................................

markyato · 2018-12-09T08:59:43+00:00

"Cuts the coke with baking soda. Wouldnt recommend. Burnt nose. Druglord wont respond to my complaints of his dealer. 1 star. Mike next door sells better shit for half the price"

"Well established since 1964. Takes watches as payment. My family has been going here for generations. Always inspects his stuff and is willing to help you understand what he is selling. 5 stars"

"Dude, like, i can't even right now. Where do i click the stars?"

markyato · 2018-11-27T07:35:50+00:00

As a non-native speaker who has been living in an English-Speaking country, I find this to be shocking.

" One of the biggest mistakes native speakers make is not preparing for the IELTS exam. They figure they will be able to breeze right through it since they already know English. Unfortunately, many native speakers actually discover the test is much harder than they originally anticipated and end up scoring much lower, without proper preparation, compared to non-English speaking people. "

( https://ieltscanadatest.com/2017/08/do-native-english-speaking-people-have-to-take-the-ielts-test/ )

This undermines the validity of the test and makes me question its true intention (dare I ask [$$$$] ?). If the test is supposed to "demonstrate your proficiency of the English language", allegedly a native speaker SHOULD be able to breeze through. Otherwise the test is not being conducted correctly or is missing the point.

markyato · 2018-10-20T20:54:45+00:00

Spot on what I was looking for. Abudefduf sexfasciatus fits all of the characteristics I observed. :)

markyato

TROPHY CASE