@FLORIDABUTTERF1 @alexmeshkin You can do mail in from home, but it's not that accessible can be expensive if you can't find a free one, and adds a bit more time to get results.

@FLORIDABUTTERF1 @alexmeshkin 您可以在家中发送邮件，但如果您找不到免费的邮件，那么访问可能会很昂贵，并且会增加一些时间来获得结果。

@gardengirl778 @mtosterholm CDC doesn't and has never 'mandated' anything apart from travel. They're using that as an excuse. It isn't accurate and likely isn't sincere.
CDC unconditionally guides masking days 6-10. That's the most CDC can do so if that's not good enough for your policymakers, nothing is.

@gardengirl778 @mtosterholm CDC 没有也从未“强制”过除了旅行之外的任何事情。他们以此为借口。它不准确，也可能不真诚。
CDC 无条件指导第 6-10 天的掩蔽。如果这对您的政策制定者来说还不够好，那是 CDC 最多可以做到的，没有什么是。

@cosmicjohn2276 @DefMon3 Supposedly at least in part an AI. Not kidding.

@cosmicjohn2276 @DefMon3 据说至少部分是人工智能。不开玩笑。

@wsbgnl The economy is not that great. There is a lot of drag from sickness and it's associated disruptions. They're spinning a message of success ("Most jobs created!") premised on base effects.

@wsbgnl 经济没那么好。疾病带来了很多阻力，并带来了相关的干扰。他们正在以基本效果为前提来传达成功的信息（“创造了大多数工作！”）。

@phoenixonwheels @snowmanonfire @mehdirhasan @DrEricDing See also a chain smoking habitual drunk driver who is still alive.

@phoenixonwheels @snowmanonfire @mehdirhasan @DrEricDing 另请参阅还活着的连锁吸烟习惯性醉酒司机。

@rolster20 @mehdirhasan It was happening before vaccines existed.

@rolster20 @mehdirhasan 这发生在疫苗出现之前。

@farid__jalali @mehdirhasan https://twitter.com/wsbgnl/sta...

@farid__jalali @mehdirhasan https://twitter.com/wsbgnl/sta...

@HFentonMudd @NjbBari3 “🎯”

@HFentonMudd @NjbBari3 “🎯”

@NuritBaytch @ChristosArgyrop Well, one hopes well ventilated, but.... https://t.co/Bm3Q8u809L

@NuritBaytch @ChristosArgyrop 好吧，希望通风良好，但是.... https://t.co/Bm3Q8u809L

@NuritBaytch @ChristosArgyrop Wow. Good news that it was a false alarm.

@NuritBaytch @ChristosArgyrop 哇。好消息，这是一场虚惊。

@NuritBaytch @ChristosArgyrop Vision exam can be done with a good mask, no? But if not urgent can understand waiting.

@NuritBaytch @ChristosArgyrop 视力检查可以用一个好的面罩完成，不是吗？但如果不紧急可以理解等待。

@stuartbuck1 @jhong @moskov @dnathe4th @JohnArnoldFndtn @adamnash Maybe the optionality to decide later when and where to give is worth something (for example, not having enough time to study it, or wanting to accumulate more funds before doing so). Still, it's a charitable cause, you're not personally benefitting from that optionality.

@stuartbuck1 @jhong @moskov @dnathe4th @JohnArnoldFndtn @adamnash 也许稍后决定何时何地捐赠的选择性是值得的（例如，没有足够的时间学习它，或者想在这样做之前积累更多的资金）。尽管如此，这是一项慈善事业，您个人并没有从这种可选性中受益。

@Algorithmus22 @FinchTH @alexmeshkin People go to a store and buy what is on the shelf, or get whatever comes up first on Amazon. They have no idea what they are getting and no idea how to find out.
I'm capable of finding some information to compare them, but even most of the obvious google searches don't work.

@Algorithmus22 @FinchTH @alexmeshkin 人们去商店购买货架上的商品，或者购买亚马逊上最先出现的商品。他们不知道他们得到了什么，也不知道如何找出答案。
我能够找到一些信息来比较它们，但即使是大多数明显的谷歌搜索也不起作用。

@Algorithmus22 @FinchTH @alexmeshkin I don't recall if I saw that paper, but expecting the public to read papers is a terrible approach.

@Algorithmus22 @FinchTH @alexmeshkin 我不记得我是否看过那篇论文，但是期望公众阅读论文是一种糟糕的方法。

@Travel_Buddha @emmartin173 @AWeissmann_ Payroll tax, right?

@Travel_Buddha @emmartin173 @AWeissmann_ 工资税，对吧？

@FinchTH @Algorithmus22 @alexmeshkin Funny, it's extremely difficult to find good information on this.

@FinchTH @Algorithmus22 @alexmeshkin 有趣的是，很难找到这方面的好信息。

@FinchTH @Algorithmus22 @alexmeshkin I suspect not following the directions fully is another reason. There are probably a lot of 2 second swabs when the instructions all say 15 seconds.

@FinchTH @Algorithmus22 @alexmeshkin 我怀疑没有完全遵循指示是另一个原因。当说明都说 15 秒时，可能有很多 2 秒的拭子。

@alexmeshkin Okay for you to make that choice, but how can we expect people to make good choices without good information.
Nobody will answer. How much does -RAT reduce chance of exposure? If the answer is zero, so be it, if it is 1% or 10% or 50% or whatever, same. What's the answer?

@alexmeshkin 好吧，您可以做出这样的选择，但是我们怎么能期望人们在没有好的信息的情况下做出好的选择。
没有人会回答。 -RAT 能降低多少暴露机会？如果答案是零，那就这样吧，如果是 1% 或 10% 或 50% 或其他什么，都一样。答案是什么？

@alexmeshkin My question would be how beneficial they are for screening. Does RAT make it safer to gather, to any significant degree? No one seems to know or if they are they aren't saying.

@alexmeshkin 我的问题是它们对筛选有多大好处。 RAT 是否在很大程度上使收集变得更安全？似乎没有人知道，或者他们没有说。

@alexmeshkin Certainly not, but most people aren't getting PCRs without a good reason absent some enormous policy change like turning into China. So the question comes down to whether to use the RAT or do nothing at all and get together anyway. I don't know what that's worth.

@alexmeshkin 当然不是，但是大多数人没有充分的理由没有获得 PCR，因为没有像进入中国这样的巨大政策变化。因此，问题归结为是使用 RAT 还是什么都不做，无论如何都聚在一起。我不知道那有什么价值。