LTS

https://www.rochesterfirst.com/news/state-news/new-york-releases-list-of-specific-businesses-that-can-reopen-in-phase-one/ That should sort through it for you.

It's these reports that just keep me coming back to the fact that we are learning different and new things each day. I'm not anyone has a firm grasp on all of it. I'm not sure that we can say with any certainty that one course is better than another. We can certainly hypothesize that limiting contact is effective but to what end? Are those who are highly susceptible to the virus going to be impacted regardless of when they get it and those who are not going to get through it? Hard to say. Obviously having a true vaccine would be exceedingly awesome, but we don't know if we'll get one and every time there are "new symptoms" it makes me wonder if they aren't variations of the virus where a vaccine that was created for what we saw 1 month ago would no longer be effective against what is seen in these patients. Bottom line? It's a boatload of uncertainty. Regardless of how anyone feels about social measures.. news like this will always be welcome! Such great news.

Hung out near Lake Ontario yesterday. Shot a quick video. Yeah.. that sucked.

Wife made enchiladas... I had no idea she was making anything but I guess my daughter asked for it. We usually only make them after I have run the chicken through the smoker... Sadly the cork on my Extra Anejo had dried out.. guess I left it hanging around a bit too long (Casa Noble Single Barrel). I mean, it was the most expensive alcohol I have ever purchased and I didn't want to just.. chug it. ? So.. anyway.. the stuff went bad.. and also had bits of cork floating in it. Sigh.

I like Cookie Monster singing... never heard that either. I also tend to step away as soon as that guttural lyric crap comes into play. It's never really appealed to me. If their songs never employed that I would probably listen to them... but I just can't keep it on with that style of singing in it.

I did, but my wife got sick of cleaning up vomit and told me to stop.

Even if there is a vaccine, regardless of its efficacy, it will be an eternity before it is rolled out. The manufacturing logistics, distribution, priority ranking for who gets vaccinated and when... Reading an article this morning on how various parts of the US are handling the "wearing of masks" concept... it's about to get real ugly.

Sadly it's an indicator of overall society. It's why "we" are who "we" are those pages depict perfect examples of why the US operates as it does and continues to get worse. That level of laziness and lack of desire to assist continues to seep deeper and deeper into the fabric of our society. The statement assumes that everyone is on FB and part of the page no less. "You mean everyone isn't just like me?" Derp. I'd be happy to just walk down the street and place it on the doorstep and say.. hey, they messed up, here's your package.

My celebration begins and ends with a bottle that says Extra Anejo on it.

Okay, well the Noah comment had me wondering. You are right, and the documentary points out some of that hypocrisy. People buying into "green" energy under the premise it's better for the environment when it's really just better for the corporations behind it. Your point on consumption is spot on. That's the underlying premise. Too many people, consuming too many resources. I give Greta Thunberg credit (for as much as I know) in that she refused to FLY to the US. I am guilty of it as well and have tried to step back consumption. If I want/need something i try to buy it used before buying something new. Overall I definitely consume less than many, but I'm not good enough either. Not even close.

Clearly I am not. Clearly you don't understand the phrasing as it's used despite it being something quite commonly used. In order to calculate society's collective stupidity you would average the levels of stupidity in each member of society. The resultant number being in the realm of stupid would indicate that on the whole, society is stupid. It would not mean everyone is. This is the society that gave you increased ER visits when their President indicated they should use lysol to treat a virus afterall. So, yes, hang out in my neighborhood FB page and you'll see a lot more stupid than not.

Well done. Not what I said, but you get points for trying. I would have thought that the lack of automobiles would have reduced the fumes you inhale while living under that bridge of yours but apparently the damage is permanent.

While we do have the ability to probably ruin the planet, I suppose if you define ruination as the cessation of existence of this big rock we are on, then no.. it won't be ruined, it will still exist. It just won't be anything like what we're on today and most, if not all, life will be gone. Before I respond.. how serious is this post? Because honestly, it has the tone of being quite facetious.

A tale repeated on neighborhood facebook groups all over. Ours is no different. Nothing like having proof of society's stupidity.

You know... "bear eats woman, news at 11". It's all about claiming you have something first and then allowing for some time to get it all together to publish. Only in the day of the Internet, someone else could likely scoop him now that he's announced "there's something there!'

The sobering fact, and I've felt this way since reading about recycling that never get recycled, is that we simply consume too much on this planet and there are too many people doing it. I'm a firm believer that the events happening in nature are the natural order balancing the equation (to pull from multiple sci-fi themes). We're simply breaking the planet and the ultimate question is whether we are intelligent enough to complete the task and not wise enough to prevent it. As we ruin the planet, the planets protections are stripped away and thus extreme weather, natural disasters, disease are likely to spread. They knock down the population count. From a purely analytical viewpoint it's fascinating. From any other viewpoint.. not so much.

If I am not mistaken there have been various points in time where deaths were attributed to COVID-19 without actual testing and positive identification. Mostly, I am sure, because they could not actually test everyone to confirm. I wonder how many deaths could have been simply flu related, etc. While I am being skeptical of overall reported deaths I am not trying to diminish the seriousness of the situation so much as, the numbers might not be as accurate (while still being significant). This also... or did we go back and attribute deaths that seemed to match the symptoms and just assume? (although clearly not in February if the number was 0) Without being too political here this is a good reason why when people talk about universal healthcare, etc. I don't think it will succeed in the US. It would be a massive culture shock for people to adopt the lifestyles and priorities that have worked in another culture. Spending 1 week in Sweden it was ABUNDANTLY clear that people operated differently and that it stems from an intrinsic social value system that is fundamentally different than the US.

There's a brief discussion on hydrogen fuel cells as well.

Based on what you said here I think this documentary will open your eyes even more. The underlying tone is that green energy is anything but green and is a fallacy that is being pushed on the unaware public and has largely been something democrats have been involved with. Al Gore is prominently features in this as is Van Jones. It really opens your eyes near the end when they play the whole "Follow the money" game.

I'm not arguing for or against anything at the moment. I'm allowing for an understanding of why people are against the who mitigation practice. Even if I believe I am not at as high a risk as others I allow for the fact that others are and that they are out and about as well. I take my actions because I respect the current situation. At the same time, the definition of the current situation is constantly changing. Everyone knows that things will re-open, so it's not as though that has been closed off to the world. The questions are how fast and with what rules? Each day we grow closer to that end scenario there are going to be people who say "We;ve been cautious enough, let's go". Naturally that does not change or help those, like Weave, who are knowingly at an increased risk to this virus. I, personally, have no real interest in being a carrier that harms someone else. So I still choose to keep my distance. I can feel my own irritation growing at the rules that are in place. I 100% cannot stand the concept of wearing a mask. At least with regards to the mask scenario I can simply choose to not go into stores. As for the rest of it, I'll keep waiting for the next rule or change to be put in place and go from there. If I were allowed to go hang out at a bar right now would I? Yes. I would. But I'm not also about to go protest against the current standards. I'm not so opposed to the current way of life that I feel the need to work against the system. Hopefully that better explains things. Understood and that's really a problem overall. There is a good portion of the population who don't outwardly fall into the at-risk categories, or at the very least what's considered to be the at-risk categories. We don't really know enough to know who is at risk, there are many theories. You're not incorrect, but I watch people pull up 3 vehicles next to each other in a parking lot and hang out in a similar fashion. I think the bottom line is that people who don't want to isolate themselves are not going to do so as it's clear they aren't right now. The resulting question is, do you lock things down more to include the tailgating as being illegal, do you open it up because people are doing it anyway, or do you leave it as is with the mixed bag allowing for people to question "what the hell is going on?" I don't have that answer, not yet. These scenarios exist everywhere. Isolation is an illusion at this point. At best it can be said there is an attitude that leans towards mitigated contact, but if you roll up to a gas pump or use instacart, or even walk in a store and pick up a box of triscuits you are immediately not isolating yourself. We can see these scenarios everywhere, which is what leads me to believe that we'll find out that a great many of us have been exposed and will have never known it. In what you are saying, I don't think it's a stretch to see that any activity really leads to transmission. Ultimately it boils down to mitigating the social circle one is in. If, 4 months ago I had sauntered off to live in a commune with 100 other people and by choice we avoided contact with the outside world we'd all be safe and these measures would be irrelevant to us. Of course all that would end as soon as a single person increased the social circle's exposure. Yeah, at the same time my son who just turned 16 wants to go get a job... at the supermarket. I have to ask myself how I feel about that. Do we let him? He doesn't seem to care about risks, do I care about risks of what he brings home? Do I believe that he can be responsible with the rules that will be put in place on him given that he's not particularly good at even following rules around the house? It's a tough call. And that's the very nature of the problem. Now I read about skin rashes on toes and fingers being linked. It feels like each day the understanding of how this virus impacts the body is changing. We'll have an understanding of things at some point, my only question is whether that will come before or after the general population has had enough of social distancing and demands that they be allowed to accept the risks of what could happen.

Figured we might try a different level of political discussion in here... because this certainly slams all parties pretty good. Watched this last night, it's the full documentary right on YouTube, so you can watch it for free (right now anyway). I'll get into it more in a bit. I figured I'd throw it out here for people to watch first.

Watched this last night... not in 100% alignment, but it certainly resonates with me. I am 100% not a fan of Michael Moore overall, although he only was an executive producer on this and not the force behind it. That said... it's something we really need to wake up to. I'm posting this here because it fits in this thread on the surface. Discussion of it should be in the politics club I would imagine.

It's all well and good, but people are out at essential stores all the time. The concept, initially, was fundamentally sound, but as time goes on its falling apart. More the point I was making, and you didn't address, is that those who have had, or may not have severe reactions to it (or at least believe that) would not be a strain on the healthcare system because they wouldn't be impacted. As such, they mitigate the situation naturally. Of course no one KNOWS they are not at severe risk, but as we learn more and more about this virus we are also realizing that more and more people may have had it and never known it. It furthers the discussion as to who really needs to be protected. Overall, that's the question that will be raised. How far is too far when it comes to protecting those at higher risk? I was out yesterday, but we avoid locations where there would be groups of people. At peak there were 6 people standing in a 40 acre space. ? What gets me right now is what is open and what is not. I think that leads people to question the validity of any closures. Campground are now closed through the end of May. Golf courses and marinas are open, but campgrounds? No.

I can understand your situation as you describe it but I think there are a good number of people who may not have the same risk as you do. So, the essential question is, should others, who may or may not have the same level of risk be forced to live in a way that protect those who are in the same boat as you or is it incumbent upon people in your situation to reduce your own risk by not venturing out into a society where there is something that can kill you? I think about this situation quite often and I see arguments on both sides. For me it boils down to what is a reasonable level of restrictions that should be put in place to protect people who are at increased risk. I don't know that answer. Personally, I am not of the opinion that current restrictions are ridiculous. I don't particularly love the whole wear a mask demand. I've complied with that by simply not going into stores or anywhere where it would be required. It appeared that way for me. I figured I should answer just so you didn't think it was just you.

I could see that possibility. I hesitate to assign it to that fully only because then I would have to "blame" the organization for another bad decision and without 100% proof I don't want to do it so I leave the "blame" at the poster level.