Pretty good explanation why wearing masks & keeping distance are a good thing.

Same thing applies to computer/internet security, btw.


@sybren I remember seeing a similar diagram for aviation security too. One layer is not enough, so several layers are combined. Accidents only occur when the holes of all layers overlap.

@sybren yet people that are involved in covid19 transmission are trounced for not habing worn a mask at the time of infection.

my antagonism towards mask wearing is it being view as a complete barrier against covid19. when nations are told that everyone is suspect and law enforcement enforces mask wearing, yet there are not enough resources for rapid testing, and social distancing is impractical and expensive, how sensible is mask wearing when all other barriers are not used?

@sybren You have to be careful like with two factor authentication, the corporation giving you the phone verification cheese is selling you out to market analysts, and the corporation giving you the password cheese is punching a giant hole in it by storing millions of passwords on its servers.

Compare that with public key authentication cheese, which has no holes, and there’s no reason any corporation wouldn’t allow you to use it.

@sybren according to Harvard, none of the available tests are accurate, the results cannot be trusted.

@sybren it's rarely that simple. More layers of security introduce more complexity and additional vulnerabilities, and each layer has a cost, in ease of use, maintenance, and when *anything* breaks, for any reason, each layer is suspect to consider, even the interaction of layers can be problematic, which means your research time goes up exponentially. IMO, better to keep things simple.

@pj Oh absolutely! I wish that security was as simple as stacking some more layers on top of each other.

I think this image is mostly to undermine the "this [layer of cheese] is not perfect, so it is worthless" mentality some people seem to express, and for that I think it's pretty good.

@sybren well, doctors are saying the 'big droplets' theory is wrong, since moisture kills the virus. Viruses are nothing new, why the masks now? It's fake news.

@sybren that's right, and masks are deadly according to #drfauci you'll die from #bacterial #pneumonia

@pj Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Ha. Yeaaaah, sure. That's why there are so few people left in China (where they regularly wear masks, and have been for a long time, in case you didn't know about that yet). Yeah, masks kill, of course, of course.

Listen, a cushion is deadly as well, when you're smothered to death with one. I still use one in my bed to sleep on, thank you very much.

Simple "Wahrheiten" für simple Gemüter.
Tatsächlich aber einfach nur gesammelter Blödsinn.

@wauz Actually, no, this isn't nonsense at all. I'm not a biologist, but I do have a Ph.D. in computer science with some familiarity with computer security. I might know a bit what I'm talking about. But feel free to do with this info whatever pleases you.

I'm an empirist. From sociology. I am a research theorist and specialist in gathering, aggregating and interpreting data.
I can tell, that caricature is complete bullshit, and I see often, that computer theorists fail to assess data, as well as they fail to see incompatible claims.
The graphic you sent, clearly represents all this fails very exact.
It says more about your thinking than the reality outside, that only can be found by decent methods you don't know at all

What you are telling about, is not biology and not computer science. It's epidemiology. And that is in a greater part a social science, because it is on humans in society, their properties and behavior.
A part of the claims of the graphic touches other scientific branches, like physics.
Sociology is kind of the sausage making in all sciences: it puts in the leftovers of the others. So we are well trained in judging and assessing those in our daily business.
You are obviously not.

@wauz You mean to say that there are limitations to the correctness & amount of information a single, simple image can convey? That's amazing.

Also, the image is not "complete bullshit". Apparently it is missing insight that you personally do have. From your perspective it may be missing so much that you call it "bullshit". That doesn't mean it's without value, or that it can make people think.

Just because you know other stuff than I do, doesn't mean my knowledge is useless. Stop polarising.

Regard, that I only have 500 for a statement. That image refers to a lot of doubtable and discussion-worth claims/issues/whatever, which are set in public as mere truth. It's rather bear truth, in the sense of German saying hauling someone a bear (fooling).
In same way, regard, that I'm native German and the scientific langue in Sociology is German here.
Well, if you want, I talk about my objections against that pic. It will be a larger thread, due to 4 layers and the whole thing to see

Sign in to participate in the conversation

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!