comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 21 seconds ago
“ Media often like to compare previous ‘what if’ scenarios with what really happens, but that misses the point. One of The Spectator data tracker Sage scenarios vs actual outcome graphs presents a ‘what if we do not introduce more restrictions’ scenario with what really happened, ignoring the fact that new restrictions were introduced. It is misinterpretation to say that because the graphs don’t match, SPI-M modellers were wrong. It’s a bit like being commissioned to draw a picture of a cat that the owner plans to adopt but then, when they actually decide to adopt a dog, being told your picture is completely wrong: goalposts being shifted around long after the ball has been kicked.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and several (including the one I gave as an example that you’re still ignoring) were about reducing restrictions in a gradual minor manner vs gradual notable manner vs quicker minor manner vs quicker notable manner

I believe it was purple, red yellow and blue on the graph 😂

Their purple prediction which was the quicker and more notable reduction in precautionary behaviours had us at around 500 deaths in October
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not ignoring it! Saying in effect”assumptions are sensitive to change” is something I’ve been saying for literally years now,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure they can be wrong just as it was wrong to say that the worst case scenario never came to pass which is why the numbers don’t match.

Sometimes they’re just plain wrong. In this instance about 3 times out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3 times?

comment by Amado Carrillo Fuentes (U11781)
posted 5 seconds ago
Breaking News: Moderna said lab tests of its booster vaccine show it significantly raises the level of antibodies that can thwart the Omicron variant.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/20/health/moderna-covid-booster-omicron.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Good news!

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 21 seconds ago
“ Media often like to compare previous ‘what if’ scenarios with what really happens, but that misses the point. One of The Spectator data tracker Sage scenarios vs actual outcome graphs presents a ‘what if we do not introduce more restrictions’ scenario with what really happened, ignoring the fact that new restrictions were introduced. It is misinterpretation to say that because the graphs don’t match, SPI-M modellers were wrong. It’s a bit like being commissioned to draw a picture of a cat that the owner plans to adopt but then, when they actually decide to adopt a dog, being told your picture is completely wrong: goalposts being shifted around long after the ball has been kicked.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and several (including the one I gave as an example that you’re still ignoring) were about reducing restrictions in a gradual minor manner vs gradual notable manner vs quicker minor manner vs quicker notable manner

I believe it was purple, red yellow and blue on the graph 😂

Their purple prediction which was the quicker and more notable reduction in precautionary behaviours had us at around 500 deaths in October
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not ignoring it! Saying in effect”assumptions are sensitive to change” is something I’ve been saying for literally years now,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure they can be wrong just as it was wrong to say that the worst case scenario never came to pass which is why the numbers don’t match.

Sometimes they’re just plain wrong. In this instance about 3 times out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3 times?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye - 3 times higher than what actually transpired

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 21 seconds ago
“ Media often like to compare previous ‘what if’ scenarios with what really happens, but that misses the point. One of The Spectator data tracker Sage scenarios vs actual outcome graphs presents a ‘what if we do not introduce more restrictions’ scenario with what really happened, ignoring the fact that new restrictions were introduced. It is misinterpretation to say that because the graphs don’t match, SPI-M modellers were wrong. It’s a bit like being commissioned to draw a picture of a cat that the owner plans to adopt but then, when they actually decide to adopt a dog, being told your picture is completely wrong: goalposts being shifted around long after the ball has been kicked.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and several (including the one I gave as an example that you’re still ignoring) were about reducing restrictions in a gradual minor manner vs gradual notable manner vs quicker minor manner vs quicker notable manner

I believe it was purple, red yellow and blue on the graph 😂

Their purple prediction which was the quicker and more notable reduction in precautionary behaviours had us at around 500 deaths in October
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not ignoring it! Saying in effect”assumptions are sensitive to change” is something I’ve been saying for literally years now,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure they can be wrong just as it was wrong to say that the worst case scenario never came to pass which is why the numbers don’t match.

Sometimes they’re just plain wrong. In this instance about 3 times out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3 times?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye - 3 times higher than what actually transpired
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was the highest daily death count in October 167?

Though nearly two years ago, I downloaded and ran the modelling code Prof Neil Ferguson used, it was pretty involved process building it, the code wasn't great and it used all 32GB of RAM. The outputs varied widely depending on assumptions. For example his non intervention assumption included things like 40 percent of symptomatic people attending work. Which if changed had huge impact on data output.

There was stuff to do with transmission from children, which I can't remember if it was omitted because at the time we thought kids couldn't spread it(the thinking changed), or whether the model failed to separate the transmissiblity rates amongst the under 18s.

Models are more often than not wrong, but they are the best we have. Hopefully the more separate models you have, added with the things that remain true when assumptions are changed, the consensus starts to firm up.

I remember chatting with Covid data scientists in Feb 2020 who were "unconcerned". How quickly things change.

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 21 seconds ago
“ Media often like to compare previous ‘what if’ scenarios with what really happens, but that misses the point. One of The Spectator data tracker Sage scenarios vs actual outcome graphs presents a ‘what if we do not introduce more restrictions’ scenario with what really happened, ignoring the fact that new restrictions were introduced. It is misinterpretation to say that because the graphs don’t match, SPI-M modellers were wrong. It’s a bit like being commissioned to draw a picture of a cat that the owner plans to adopt but then, when they actually decide to adopt a dog, being told your picture is completely wrong: goalposts being shifted around long after the ball has been kicked.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and several (including the one I gave as an example that you’re still ignoring) were about reducing restrictions in a gradual minor manner vs gradual notable manner vs quicker minor manner vs quicker notable manner

I believe it was purple, red yellow and blue on the graph 😂

Their purple prediction which was the quicker and more notable reduction in precautionary behaviours had us at around 500 deaths in October
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not ignoring it! Saying in effect”assumptions are sensitive to change” is something I’ve been saying for literally years now,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure they can be wrong just as it was wrong to say that the worst case scenario never came to pass which is why the numbers don’t match.

Sometimes they’re just plain wrong. In this instance about 3 times out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3 times?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye - 3 times higher than what actually transpired
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was the highest daily death count in October 167?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you genuinely asking or being a little pedantic?

comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 57 seconds ago
Though nearly two years ago, I downloaded and ran the modelling code Prof Neil Ferguson used, it was pretty involved process building it, the code wasn't great and it used all 32GB of RAM. The outputs varied widely depending on assumptions. For example his non intervention assumption included things like 40 percent of symptomatic people attending work. Which if changed had huge impact on data output.

There was stuff to do with transmission from children, which I can't remember if it was omitted because at the time we thought kids couldn't spread it(the thinking changed), or whether the model failed to separate the transmissiblity rates amongst the under 18s.

Models are more often than not wrong, but they are the best we have. Hopefully the more separate models you have, added with the things that remain true when assumptions are changed, the consensus starts to firm up.

I remember chatting with Covid data scientists in Feb 2020 who were "unconcerned". How quickly things change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting. I recall talking to one of the really prominent actuaries in the covid response back in early Jan 2020 and he was hugely worried about what was coming. At the time on the call I was like “are ye aye?”. Little did I know then,

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 21 seconds ago
“ Media often like to compare previous ‘what if’ scenarios with what really happens, but that misses the point. One of The Spectator data tracker Sage scenarios vs actual outcome graphs presents a ‘what if we do not introduce more restrictions’ scenario with what really happened, ignoring the fact that new restrictions were introduced. It is misinterpretation to say that because the graphs don’t match, SPI-M modellers were wrong. It’s a bit like being commissioned to draw a picture of a cat that the owner plans to adopt but then, when they actually decide to adopt a dog, being told your picture is completely wrong: goalposts being shifted around long after the ball has been kicked.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and several (including the one I gave as an example that you’re still ignoring) were about reducing restrictions in a gradual minor manner vs gradual notable manner vs quicker minor manner vs quicker notable manner

I believe it was purple, red yellow and blue on the graph 😂

Their purple prediction which was the quicker and more notable reduction in precautionary behaviours had us at around 500 deaths in October
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not ignoring it! Saying in effect”assumptions are sensitive to change” is something I’ve been saying for literally years now,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure they can be wrong just as it was wrong to say that the worst case scenario never came to pass which is why the numbers don’t match.

Sometimes they’re just plain wrong. In this instance about 3 times out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3 times?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye - 3 times higher than what actually transpired
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was the highest daily death count in October 167?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you genuinely asking or being a little pedantic?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m being pedantic. 😃

comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
Though nearly two years ago, I downloaded and ran the modelling code Prof Neil Ferguson used, it was pretty involved process building it, the code wasn't great and it used all 32GB of RAM. The outputs varied widely depending on assumptions. For example his non intervention assumption included things like 40 percent of symptomatic people attending work. Which if changed had huge impact on data output.

There was stuff to do with transmission from children, which I can't remember if it was omitted because at the time we thought kids couldn't spread it(the thinking changed), or whether the model failed to separate the transmissiblity rates amongst the under 18s.

Models are more often than not wrong, but they are the best we have. Hopefully the more separate models you have, added with the things that remain true when assumptions are changed, the consensus starts to firm up.

I remember chatting with Covid data scientists in Feb 2020 who were "unconcerned". How quickly things change.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah it’s not an easy job. The mere fact that the variation they’re using most recently is by a factor of ten shows how nigh on impossible it is.

Predictions, sorry modelling not predictions, are incredibly difficult beyond a reasonable amount of time.

comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 25 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 14 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 7 seconds ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 49 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by bmcl1987 (U14177)
posted 21 seconds ago
“ Media often like to compare previous ‘what if’ scenarios with what really happens, but that misses the point. One of The Spectator data tracker Sage scenarios vs actual outcome graphs presents a ‘what if we do not introduce more restrictions’ scenario with what really happened, ignoring the fact that new restrictions were introduced. It is misinterpretation to say that because the graphs don’t match, SPI-M modellers were wrong. It’s a bit like being commissioned to draw a picture of a cat that the owner plans to adopt but then, when they actually decide to adopt a dog, being told your picture is completely wrong: goalposts being shifted around long after the ball has been kicked.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes and several (including the one I gave as an example that you’re still ignoring) were about reducing restrictions in a gradual minor manner vs gradual notable manner vs quicker minor manner vs quicker notable manner

I believe it was purple, red yellow and blue on the graph 😂

Their purple prediction which was the quicker and more notable reduction in precautionary behaviours had us at around 500 deaths in October
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not ignoring it! Saying in effect”assumptions are sensitive to change” is something I’ve been saying for literally years now,
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure they can be wrong just as it was wrong to say that the worst case scenario never came to pass which is why the numbers don’t match.

Sometimes they’re just plain wrong. In this instance about 3 times out.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
3 times?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Aye - 3 times higher than what actually transpired
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was the highest daily death count in October 167?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Are you genuinely asking or being a little pedantic?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m being pedantic. 😃
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You little khoont ye

#VaccineNews 💉

NEW: Moderna said laboratory tests of its booster vaccine show it significantly raises the level of antibodies that can thwart the #Omicron variant (NYTimes)

The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World by Stewart and Cohen is one of my favourite books, it explains the difficulty in adjusting levers in complex multivariable dynamic systems and how counter intuitive some interventions are.

Dave who used to chat on here liked the book so much it worked his way into his undergraduate curriculum. Great book.

comment by De Gea's Legs (U14210)
posted 5 minutes ago
#VaccineNews 💉

NEW: Moderna said laboratory tests of its booster vaccine show it significantly raises the level of antibodies that can thwart the #Omicron variant (NYTimes)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Arab beat yoy

comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 5 minutes ago
The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World by Stewart and Cohen is one of my favourite books, it explains the difficulty in adjusting levers in complex multivariable dynamic systems and how counter intuitive some interventions are.

Dave who used to chat on here liked the book so much it worked his way into his undergraduate curriculum. Great book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A stocking filler for BMCL methinks

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 5 minutes ago
The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World by Stewart and Cohen is one of my favourite books, it explains the difficulty in adjusting levers in complex multivariable dynamic systems and how counter intuitive some interventions are.

Dave who used to chat on here liked the book so much it worked his way into his undergraduate curriculum. Great book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A stocking filler for BMCL methinks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Along with pointys leg.

comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 26 minutes ago
The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World by Stewart and Cohen is one of my favourite books, it explains the difficulty in adjusting levers in complex multivariable dynamic systems and how counter intuitive some interventions are.

Dave who used to chat on here liked the book so much it worked his way into his undergraduate curriculum. Great book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have the dot to dot and couring in version of thon book.

Happy Christmas Admin lad.

Stay aff the devils butermilk as Big Ian was spot on,,lol.

comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 26 seconds ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 26 minutes ago
The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World by Stewart and Cohen is one of my favourite books, it explains the difficulty in adjusting levers in complex multivariable dynamic systems and how counter intuitive some interventions are.

Dave who used to chat on here liked the book so much it worked his way into his undergraduate curriculum. Great book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have the dot to dot and couring in version of thon book.

Happy Christmas Admin lad.

Stay aff the devils butermilk as Big Ian was spot on,,lol.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ffs colouring in and buttermilk.

comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 5 minutes ago
The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World by Stewart and Cohen is one of my favourite books, it explains the difficulty in adjusting levers in complex multivariable dynamic systems and how counter intuitive some interventions are.

Dave who used to chat on here liked the book so much it worked his way into his undergraduate curriculum. Great book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A stocking filler for BMCL methinks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Along with pointys leg.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Greeting young TBAB

New fon for crimbo?

Stay safe lads and dinnae let the virus drag yeez doon.

I need to start having work meetings with wine and cheese.

comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 26 minutes ago
The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World by Stewart and Cohen is one of my favourite books, it explains the difficulty in adjusting levers in complex multivariable dynamic systems and how counter intuitive some interventions are.

Dave who used to chat on here liked the book so much it worked his way into his undergraduate curriculum. Great book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have the dot to dot and couring in version of thon book.

Happy Christmas Admin lad.

Stay aff the devils butermilk as Big Ian was spot on,,lol.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hope you are good buddy. Enjoy Christmas and best of health to you and your family.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 5 minutes ago
The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World by Stewart and Cohen is one of my favourite books, it explains the difficulty in adjusting levers in complex multivariable dynamic systems and how counter intuitive some interventions are.

Dave who used to chat on here liked the book so much it worked his way into his undergraduate curriculum. Great book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A stocking filler for BMCL methinks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Along with pointys leg.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Greeting young TBAB
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Flying visit, pretending to do my DWP job.

Have a good one mate.

comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 42 seconds ago
I need to start having work meetings with wine and cheese.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Join the tories.com

comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 37 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 45 seconds ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 19 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 5 minutes ago
The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World by Stewart and Cohen is one of my favourite books, it explains the difficulty in adjusting levers in complex multivariable dynamic systems and how counter intuitive some interventions are.

Dave who used to chat on here liked the book so much it worked his way into his undergraduate curriculum. Great book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
A stocking filler for BMCL methinks
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Along with pointys leg.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Greeting young TBAB
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Flying visit, pretending to do my DWP job.

Have a good one mate.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You too pal

comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by thebluebellsarablue (U9292)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Admin1 (U1)
posted 26 minutes ago
The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World by Stewart and Cohen is one of my favourite books, it explains the difficulty in adjusting levers in complex multivariable dynamic systems and how counter intuitive some interventions are.

Dave who used to chat on here liked the book so much it worked his way into his undergraduate curriculum. Great book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have the dot to dot and couring in version of thon book.

Happy Christmas Admin lad.

Stay aff the devils butermilk as Big Ian was spot on,,lol.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hope you are good buddy. Enjoy Christmas and best of health to you and your family.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cheers chum.

Taking a vow of no booze and less politics and social media for 2022, so your job gets easier, mate lol.

.