@wsbgnl Ask a lot of questions, with the framing that lack of certainty implies lack of action.

@wsbgnl提出了很多问题，缺乏确定性意味着缺乏行动。

@DailyJLee @YouAreLobbyLud This all boils down to goals. If the goal is to reduce infection we know how to do it (building capacity to suppress sustainably, without declaring victory). If the goal is to downplay and gaslight the public into being sacrificial lambs, leaders know how to do that too.

@DailyJLee@youarelobylud这一切归结为目标。如果目标是减少感染，我们知道如何做到这一点（在不宣布胜利的情况下，建设可持续抑制的能力）。如果目标是淡化公众，让他们成为牺牲品，领导人也知道该怎么做。

@EddieRNashton @lunarstudio @SpayneRob @fitterhappierAJ Agree

@埃迪·纳什顿@lunarstudio@SpayneRob@fitterhappierAJ同意

@AGoldsmithEsq @JoJoFromJerz Nothing any one person does is enough to impact Fox. You do what you think is right, or you try to organize a mass effort, and it certainly does matter if done on a large scale. Cord cutting is a major concern to the industry, they won't let Fox's bundling policies go too far.

@AGoldsmithEsq@JoJoFromJerz任何一个人所做的事情都不足以影响福克斯。你做你认为正确的事情，或者你试图组织一场大规模的努力，如果大规模地进行，这当然很重要。剪断脐带是业界的主要担忧，他们不会让福克斯的捆绑政策走得太远。

@maryaalexand1 @michaelzlin Fair, it's only the framing of shot or infection that I take issue with, not whether the shot adds value regardless (it probably does).

@maryaalexand1@michaelzlin Fair，我只对镜头或感染的框架表示异议，而不是不管镜头是否增加了价值（它可能会增加）。

@EddieRNashton @lunarstudio @SpayneRob @fitterhappierAJ I agree on that point. Go ahead and investigate. It's worthwhile but almost entirely parallel to response and preparation for future viruses.

@EddieRNashton@lunarstudio@SpayneRob@fitterhappierAJ我同意这一点。继续调查吧。这是值得的，但几乎完全与应对和准备未来病毒平行。

@lunarstudio @EddieRNashton @SpayneRob @fitterhappierAJ Even leaked documents could be argued are faked or modified. No one will be convinced except by confirmation bias.

@lunarstudio@EddieRNashton@SpayneRob@fitterhappierAJ即使泄露的文件也可能被认为是伪造或修改的。除了确认偏见，没有人会被说服。

@RasappanM @gadboit @sonia_elijah There is a reason the trial wasn't based on deaths. It wasn't powered to do so (would require a much larger or longer trial). One death can happen or not happen, essentially meaningless even if true.

@RasappanM@gadboit@sonia_elijah有一个原因，那就是审判不是以死亡为依据的。它没有动力这样做（需要更大或更长的试验）。一次死亡可以发生也可以不发生，即使是真的，也毫无意义。

@RasappanM @gadboit @sonia_elijah There is no huge difference between 1 death and 0 deaths. It's not statistically significant.

@RasappanM@gadboit@sonia_elijah 1人死亡和0人死亡之间没有太大区别。这在统计学上并不显著。

@myrtoashe @wsbgnl @sleepyknave Equally deserving of reputational consequences.

@myrtoashe@wsbgnl@sleepyknave同样应该承担声誉后果。

@EddieRNashton @lunarstudio @SpayneRob @fitterhappierAJ Go right ahead if you think you can accomplish something, but makes no practical difference to how to deal with either this virus or any future virus.

@EddieRNashton@lunarstudio@SpayneRob@fitterhappierAJ如果你认为你可以完成一些事情，那就直接去做吧，但对于如何应对这种病毒或任何未来的病毒都没有实际意义。

@RedHookStar @yaneerbaryam https://www.washingtonpost.com...

@redhookstar@yaneerbaryamhttps://www.washingtonpost.com...

@lunarstudio @SpayneRob @fitterhappierAJ People want someone to blame that is all. It's the just world theory. Bad things only happen to good people if there is a bad person responsible.

@lunarstudio@SpayneRob@fitterhappierAJ人们希望有人对此负责，仅此而已。这是正义世界理论。只有当有坏人负责时，坏事才会发生在好人身上。

@TheStalwart Binance's book has many of these. They just sit on coins.

@塔瓦特·比南斯的书中有很多这样的内容。他们只是坐在硬币上。

@Kiran21921609 @cz_binance https://twitter.com/LFG_org/st...

@Kiran21921069@cz_binancehttps://twitter.com/LFG_org/st...

@DailyJLee @YouAreLobbyLud Notice the lower increasing line which suggests an increase in mitigation (I think "ICT" = infection control techniques).
This is what a sustainable approach looks like, not yo-yo between hair-on-fire surges and "back to normal"
https://twitter.com/GearoidRei...

@DailyJLee@Youarelobylud注意到较低的增长线，这意味着缓解措施的增加（我认为“ICT”=感染控制技术）。
这是一种可持续的方法，而不是在头发着火和“恢复正常”之间游手好闲
https://twitter.com/GearoidRei...

@michaelzlin There's really no reason to compare the two. They're not a choice in opposition.

@michaelzlin真的没有理由比较这两者。他们不是反对派的选择。

@maryaalexand1 @michaelzlin You may still end up with both. The 4th shot is only going to somewhat protect against infection for a short time if at all.

@maryaalexand1@michaelzlin你可能最终还是会两者兼得。第四次注射只能在短时间内防止感染。

@jpsalvesen @bateman_ketcham @IAPonomarenko "artillery-fired atomic projectile"
Seems relevant. Don't know what's being suggested here.

@jpsalvesen@bateman_ketcham@IAPonomarenko“火炮发射的原子弹”
似乎有关系。不知道这里有什么建议。

@DexterXBT @Risk_enforcer @adam3us @SBF_FTX @0x_Messi 😂

@DexterXBT@Risk_enforcer@adam3us@SBF_FTX@0x_mesi😂