> (out of a sample of 100 people) For every one person who dies:
* 19 more require hospitalization.
* 18 of those will have permanent heart damage for the rest of their lives.
> One study published in March found that out of 416 hospitalized Covid-19 patients, 19% showed signs of heart damage.
Assuming 19 in 100 require hospitalization, according to the study: 19% of 19 will have heart damage or 3.61. Similar breakdown for other points.
Disclaimer: shutdown was the right call and the point is still valid with smaller numbers (they’re still huge). Just pointing it out.
I just spent 5 minutes typing this up only to see your post.. thank you for also noticing. The other point made from this source (about permanent lung damage) is also wrong. I don’t see sources for the other numbers.
I agree never closing the economy would’ve been a total disaster. But the math here is bad.
Writing from Ireland, >20 cases a day (as of writing).
The lockdown here was a huge success.
But looking at the US numbers it seems that you got the worse outcome of lockdown/no-lockdown. Economical hit, plus number of cases are back on the rise due to people not isolating properly.
One could argue that for US lockdown was a mistake. Or at least very costly move to delay/prepare for peak infections.
Overloading comparison operators like this is a particularly bad idea in Python, because of the "smart" behavior they have baked in. Overloading >> is comparatively safe.
Unless you implement __ge__, `'Hello!' >= document` will also call __le__, which may or may not be what you want. And `'Hello!' >= document <= 10` is equivalent to `'Hello!' >= document and document <= 10`, which can lead to confusing surprises.
(Brython does implement all of those pitfalls faithfully)
My first gig was a HLASM/COBOL internship at an insurance company.. so true, 10k line programs with all globals was the entire codebase. Navigating it with only a 3270 emulator gave me headaches but in a way it was fun. Coding it felt like doing a sudoku.
This is probably links within the readme (like #installation in a table of contents). Known problem that we didn't get to fixing, but we're going to fix this soon. Thanks for the report.
I think part of the issue is some places (where I am too) use medium for their blog and medium requires an image. Not sure if other blogging platforms do the same though.
It's not a Medium requirement. I've published plenty of articles without images, and the site just adds a blank box as a placeholder.
However, a lot of 'become popular on Medium' guides recommend you use an image, and an image likely looks better than a blank box does, hence all the images.
> Summary: Users pay close attention to photos and other images that contain relevant information but ignore fluffy pictures used to "jazz up" web pages.
I always would want a company blog to be under a company domain, which Medium doesn't allow any more. For various reasons: from a branding/search perspective, for flexibility (e.g. being able to embed whatever you want for visualizations, examples, ...) and to be able to move it without breaking all the links (e.g. when you finally decide Mediums constant popups are a bad look for your professional representation)
I feel the first is better, mainly because if the functions are named appropriately, from a glance you can glean the general idea of what the function does. And with modern ide’s, I think navigating that structure is easier than scrolling through the latter.
Of course I just got stuck writing jupyter notebooks for a month so I’m against all the scrolling crud.
> One study published in March found that out of 416 hospitalized Covid-19 patients, 19% showed signs of heart damage.
Assuming 19 in 100 require hospitalization, according to the study: 19% of 19 will have heart damage or 3.61. Similar breakdown for other points.
Disclaimer: shutdown was the right call and the point is still valid with smaller numbers (they’re still huge). Just pointing it out.