Jump to content



  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


1,449 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Contact Methods

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

269 profile views
  1. We bought an Epson Ecotank printer about 6 months ago to replace my dying color laser printer. I love it! Our model can copy, scan, and my favorite of all—duplex printing! It also has a feeder tray, so it can handle bulk copies/scans. One of the huge selling points was that we only need to replace the inks that are running low, rather than expensive and wasteful cartridges. Ink refills are around $15 and last a long time. If I remember correctly, Canon also makes a similar tank printer. We went with the Epson after reading reviews online and getting a deal at Costco. The print quality for regular documents is very good; not sure about photos since we never do that.
  2. There's always something going on in Florida 😂 Miami Herald reported this morning that Daymond John from Shark Tank had attempted to secure and sell N95 masks to the state at an inflated price: "The price would have been one of the highest the state would agree to pay for the highly coveted N95 protective mask: $7 a piece for 1 million masks. The source of the offer had cachet and seemed legit. He was Daymond John, CEO of the Shark Group and one of the stars of the popular TV show “Shark Tank.” He said he could get them for Florida but the cost would be more than three times the market price for the masks, which normally sell for under $2 each." John issued a statement on Twitter that calls the Herald article a "gross distortion of the truth" in order to "create splashy headlines to mislead readers." The state waived normal contracting rules and procedures including competitive bidding in order to secure supplies quickly, so who knows what really went on behind the scenes. Maybe they should have tried to get a better deal from Mark Cuban or Mr. Wonderful? 😂
  3. Is this amount of testing by the dates they propose plausible? I know there is a lot of research and development being done regarding testing, but I haven't read much about what is currently being made and ultimately will be put to available use in the near future. I'm not saying this information doesn't exist, just that I am personally unaware and would love to know more.
  4. I have no valuable input; I just really like that you compared playing the ukulele to petting a cat. It's a surprisingly accurate comparison 😂
  5. I think my teenagers using my computer must be skewing the results I get. My first page of Yahoo results was mostly about Celeb news, which I don't follow or read about. I normally just read my local newspaper online and supplement with some of the larger national news outlets here and there. Now I think I need to check my history to see what they've been reading that Yahoo thinks that I've been reading 😂
  6. Interesting, that article doesn't show up on the first page of Yahoo or Yahoo News for me. I did see that poll data linked from another news site. But it doesn't show up on Yahoo/Yahoo News. Maybe if I clicked around more. That's part of the confusion of online news. What you see as top billing may not even show up for me until several clicks deep due to target-based placement. Editing to add: I was checking my local news before I went to bed and realized that the Quinnipiac poll for my state was the link that I had seen earlier. As some soothing before bed reading, I went to the Quinnipiac poll site and read the poll methodology which also included all of the exact questions the surveyors asked respondents. It was really interesting seeing both questions and responses, and then seeing the responses also broken down by various categories (demographic, party affiliation, and others). The question regarding continuing the stay at home order is asked as such: "Do you think [state's name] should loosen social distancing by the end of April, or don't you think so?" Total result: Yes/should loosen, 22%; No, 72%. There are questions on the Q-poll regarding being concerned that someone you know/yourself will be infected and regarding being concerned if someone you know/yourself will need to be hospitalized, choices being Very, Somewhat, Not So, Not. I also read the NBC/WSJ poll. There is a question about worries but it as posed as a choice question (do you choose this or that): "Which worries you more about responding to the coronavirus and restrictions that require most Americans to shelter in place and only leave their homes for essential needs: That the US will move too quickly in loosening restrictions and the virus will continue to spread with more lives being lost OR That the US will take too long in loosening restrictions and the economic impact will be even worse with more jobs being lost" Total result: Choice 1, 58%; Choice 2, 32%. The Quinnipiac poll did not mention fear or worry at all. The NBC/WSJ asked about fear but only posed as a which do you fear more question. If asked that question I would choose the first option (regarding lost lives), as I do think there's more harm today in loosening too quickly and slim chance right now that we are going too slowly. But if you asked me differently my answer would come across much differently. For example, if asked if I felt my state or the local group of cooperating states was moving too quickly in loosening guidelines I would say No. I feel like they are taking a measured approach at this point and moving at an appropriate pace. Those are two similar questions asked two different ways with very different potential answers. I feel like the way this NBC/WSJ question was asked leads to a false dichotomy that assumes worry one way or another. So having read the specifics of three different polls, I think the Yahoo headline ("As some areas of the U.S. begin relaxing social distancing restrictions, a new poll showed a majority of Americans fear easing those guidelines could result in more deaths.") must have been referring to the NBC/WSJ poll. If you read how the question was asked in the poll, though, it wasn't saying people feared easing the guidelines but rather that given a choice between worrying about preceding too quickly + lives lost or worrying about moving too slowly + jobs lost, they worried more about the former than the latter. Ah, semantics.
  7. I'm hoping that because of such cases, people will take these measures more seriously than they might have a month ago. Of course, unfortunately, some people won't follow rules or sense, so I'm hoping that enforcement will be thorough. Our county sheriff seems very cautious and sounds like he will take enforcement seriously once the beaches are open. Parks have done well with patrolling and enforcement so I think that there is a chance beaches could be the same.
  8. Panic inducement is maybe not the right term, but the best substitute I could come up with for the other term being used in this thread. Whatever you call it, I'm addressing the headline that says "As some areas of the U. S. begin relaxing social distancing restrictions, a new poll showed a majority of Americans fear easing those guidelines could result in more deaths." But no such poll is linked or explained. I think it might be the poll that I referenced in my earlier post but really can't tell. If it is indeed that poll, then is it really representative of the majority of Americans? If it is the majority of Americans, then why are so few people I'm in IRL contact with expressing that fear? Why not couple the first part of that headline about states lifting restrictions with something that will assist people in understanding that this is a part of the Hammer and Dance that has been referenced in this thread? Why couple it with a mention of fear and then not even explain anywhere in the article what this fear is about, how to address it, what states are doing to mitigate those things that lead to fear, etc. Why address fear and not work to alleviate it if possible through thorough reporting? Highlighting people's fears in such a manner, especially if it is so widespread, seems to only work to stir up even more fears. If nothing else, it leads to confusion.
  9. I'm so thankful that our local parks have stayed open for exercise and fresh air. In the next county over, they have been closed for a few weeks. Some areas of my state reopened public beaches for limited hours with law/park enforcement supervision. There were pictures circulated of people going there, and Twitter shamed them and gave them their own disparaging trending hashtag. Reports from the mayors of that beach area said the reality is that people were actually following guidelines well and no arrests or citations were needed. I'm hoping that it will go well so that our beaches may open back up as well.
  10. The example I gave was right from Yahoo News. Not what I would consider a source for hard-hitting journalism, but also not a blog post or social media. I would consider it relatively reputable. I wouldn't elevate what I posted about to the level of panic-inducing (sorry I won't use that other term), but I think there is a narrative there in the headlines suggesting fear but then not explaining or fully justifying it.
  11. I know that it is possible statistically. But it was really difficult for me, an average person with one college stats class under my belt, to figure out how random their sample was. I know from your other posts that you have much more knowledge about math and statistics than I do, so if I knew you IRL and I actually cared about the stats of the poll used in this piece, I would try to find out if it was indeed a good sample. There are so many statistics thrown out in the news and media, though, to back up big over-arching claims, that it's hard to know what is accurate and what is potentially a stretch for the average reader. I'm not saying their poll sample is bad or not bad; just that it's hard for most people to even figure that out. So they just read the headline and don't dig much past that.
  12. That type of thinking didn't occur in my area*. When K-12 schools remained closed after spring break, there was initially no talk of not reopening this school year. As late as April 10, my state governor was discussing schools potentially reopening in late May even if only for a couple weeks, even after many states had announced not coming back. It wasn't until 4 days ago that he officially made the announcement to not reopen. The local community college went to online classes only after spring break, and announced about a little bit later that they would be online through the end of the spring semester and summer as well, so they were a little ahead of our K-12 information and more forward-thinking. But I know a lot of people were holding out hope to resolve things in just a month or two, not months. *Editing to say: I'm sure it did occur for some people in some (or even many) instances. I'm talking more about the general sense and tone in my area, at least initially.
  13. Regarding willful ignorance vs. confusion: I don't normally use Yahoo for anything, news-related or other, but since it was mentioned here I decided to go down the rabbit hole. There's a banner at the top of the page in orange/red that says, "U.S. death toll surpasses 45K; CDC director issues warning about second wave". Yes, that is just factual data. It's important so it doesn't seem too overly dramatic to have it take top spot and in a red banner. It's a clickable link, so I went to that page. I scroll down the page to look at the current update bullet list. This bullet catches my interest: "As some areas of the U.S. begin relaxing social distancing restrictions, a new poll showed a majority of Americans fear easing those guidelines could result in more deaths." I'm interested in this because many people I know IRL have expressed interest in opening things back up, cautiously of course. I haven't really heard of fear regarding an incremental approach, so I'm curious about this poll saying it's the majority of Americans. Clicking on the link just takes me to an article about what plans various states are putting in place, but there's no mention of the poll or fear referenced in the teaser text. I go back to the corona update page and scroll down quite a bit. There's a headline about a poll but no indication that it's the poll mentioned above: "New poll: States earn more praise for outbreak response". No mention of fear in the headline or short description, but I click on it since it does address state response. I click to see the article about this poll. The article features a large graph image at the top. Only if you scroll to the third graph do you see statistics about "widespread worry". This doesn't address fear, so maybe it's a different poll. It's hard to tell. The poll surveyed 1057 people in all 50 states + DC. That's roughly 20 people per state/district, although I realize it could have been done relative to state population since it's supposed to be a representative sample. That seems like a low number surveyed to make the conclusions of "All Americans" think x, y, or z. I know statistical samples can use small numbers if they are an accurate cross-section, but after going to the source of the poll (AP-NORC) and reading their methodology, it doesn't seem great. But then again, I took statistics many years ago, so what do I know. I'm confused as to whether this is the poll that was used to write that "a majority of Americans fear easing the guidelines". All of this to say, the news can be very confusing. In just this one instance, a news source says in a prominent place that most people fear easing guidelines. But it doesn't follow through in explaining that assertion so I don't know where it's coming from, if it's valid, whether to take it with a grain of salt given what I'm hearing IRL, and so on. I have a degree in English and have work experience in research and analysis/synthesis of various text sources, yet found it hard to analyze just this one news thread. I think about relatives who would just look at the headline, be like, "Ok, sure" and not even bother to see if there's any credence to what is being posited. That may be willful ignorance, but if the information is that difficult to get down to brass tacks I think the responsibility is on the shoulders of the journalist and media outlet rather than the average educated reader.
  14. I love homemade "refried" beans made from pintos. Now I really want to try using mayacobas in their place! I also love that your cousin gives you fancy beans for Christmas. Beans don't necessarily come to mind as the first choice for a gift, but that would be a completely welcome treat to me.
  • Create New...