用户 aeon(@ AeonCoin) 的最新消息

@watermelonpunch @DataDrivenMD It's quite remarkable. Supreme Court says "this is how you do it" and Biden administration says "🦗🦗🦗"

@[email protected]这相当了不起。最高法院说“这就是你要做的”,拜登政府说🦗🦗🦗"

发表时间:53分钟前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@NuritBaytch @CT_Bergstrom Wow, I don't recall seeing this thread, but 76-100% is most certainly NOT "upward of 99%". That is misinformation. Shame on Carl.

@[email protected]_Bergstrom哇,我不记得看到过这个帖子,但76-100%肯定不是“99%以上”。这是错误的信息。卡尔真丢脸。

发表时间:3小时前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@bweidlich @paulctan @Jason Yes however that is a lot less fundamental. Transporting large quantity of gas other than by pipeline is very challenging. Uranium is comparatively easy. Geopolitical risks were introduced in centralizing but more resolvable.

@[email protected]@Jason是的,但这远没有那么重要。除管道外,运输大量天然气非常具有挑战性。铀相对容易。在集中化过程中引入了地缘政治风险,但更容易解决。

发表时间:5小时前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@GrGuenter @yaneerbaryam Faster than that unless the curve does flatten
https://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@yaneerbaryam 10x increase per month https://t.co/k5lBcJseWX

发表时间:6小时前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin

@[email protected]的速度比这快,除非曲线变平
https://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@yaneerbaryam每月增长10倍https://t.co/k5lBcJseWX

发表时间:6小时前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@yaneerbaryam 10x increase per month https://t.co/k5lBcJseWX

@yaneerbaryam每月增长10倍https://t.co/k5lBcJseWX

发表时间:6小时前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@paulctan @Jason You don't necessarily need to have the exact same risks to want to reexamine assumptions about "unlikely" risks. That's fine. Assess and reopen. "Nah, we're going just to assume Russian gas is better" is not.

@[email protected]你不一定要有完全相同的风险才能重新检查关于“不太可能”风险的假设。那很好。评估并重新开放。“不,我们只是假设俄罗斯的天然气更好”不是。

发表时间:6小时前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@TRyanGregory There is usually some indoor components to "outdoor" events, including travel.

@TRyanGregory“户外”活动通常有一些室内部分,包括旅行。

发表时间:6小时前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@bevedoni @Jason There are several.

@贝弗多尼@杰森有几个。

发表时间:6小时前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@paulctan @Jason Closing is okay. Review, assess then reopen.

@[email protected]关门没问题。审查、评估,然后重新打开。

发表时间:6小时前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@DataDrivenMD Why is this not being done https://t.co/ScpoHWmwaw

@DataDrivenMD为什么不这样做https://t.co/ScpoHWmwaw

发表时间:8小时前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@edsuom @Kit_Yates_Maths The graph doesn't really show the excellent point you made. Going into a stores (or office, pub, etc.) with 30 other people 100 times is very different from going into that place once.

@[email protected]\u Yates\u数学这张图并没有真正显示出你的观点。与其他30人一起进入商店(或办公室、酒吧等)100次与一次进入那个地方非常不同。

发表时间:1天前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@Alexand3rTheMeh @nailatrahman @wsbgnl That's not the point at all. The point is the US had large outbreaks, as did many other places. They were all AFTER Wuhan.

@[email protected]@wsbgnl这根本不是重点。关键是美国爆发了大规模疫情,许多其他地方也是如此。他们都在追逐武汉。

发表时间:1天前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@Alexand3rTheMeh @nailatrahman @wsbgnl And US did build "hospitals", although didn't call it that. Tents in hospital parking lots and garages, Javitz center, etc.

@[email protected]@wsbgnl和美国确实建造了“医院”,尽管没有这样称呼。医院停车场和车库、哈维茨中心等的帐篷。

发表时间:1天前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@Alexand3rTheMeh @nailatrahman @wsbgnl Before January 2020? No, that didn't happen.

@2020年1月之前,[email protected]@wsbgnl?不,那没有发生。

发表时间:1天前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@Andy_Bloch There are probably other factors (age, income, race/ethnicity, size of housing units, etc) that correlate with both and cluster by zip code.

@Andy_Bloch可能还有其他因素(年龄、收入、种族/民族、住房面积等)与两者相关,并按邮政编码分类。

发表时间:1天前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@Alexand3rTheMeh @nailatrahman @wsbgnl We're not sure where a smaller number of cases happened. Nowhere else had a huge outbreak that required building hospitals.

@[email protected]@wsbgnl我们不确定在哪里发生了少量病例。其他任何地方都没有爆发过需要建造医院的大规模疫情。

发表时间:1天前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@LetsFishSmarter LOL, troll zapper. https://t.co/9UmIhYfSUb

@LetsFishSmarter LOL,troll zapper。https://t.co/9UmIhYfSUb

发表时间:1天前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@DrahoslavP @SopTrader @DiMartinoBooth Average historical error of GDPNow is +/- 0.84%. So it is possible it will be wrong about <0%, but not especially likely.

@[email protected]@DiMartinoBooth GDPNow的平均历史误差为+/-0.84%。因此,这可能是错误的<;0%,但不太可能。

发表时间:1天前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情

@DiMartinoBooth (according to one algorithmic model that isn't all that accurate)
But we will see, it is certainly possible.

@DiMartinoBooth(根据一个并不那么精确的算法模型)
但我们会看到,这肯定是可能的。

发表时间:1天前 作者:aeon @AeonCoin详情