My gut is always to mash reply, then I remember I pay and can have my silly ideas read by others!
This is wonderful -- though a bit unsettling read. One of the ways that I often work to distill or reduce technology into graspable pieces is to think of the offline (un-tech!) ways that folks used to do what the "high-tech" thing does. For your coronavirus research, it seems to me like you're putting too much stock in silly people. For one, there are no responsible voices on Twitter (I will not work to defend this claim right now) -- if they were responsible, they wouldn't waste their time there. So to originate proper research on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or even aggregated news sites seems like an effort in self-delusion. Why not stick to trusted sources like the CDC, WHO, or countless others that provide pretty boring but true information? Granted, I am lucky that I am married to a brilliant scientist who knows everything there is to about epidemiology.
Hopefully I'm tugging at some of your own apprehensions in the writing as opposed to dunking on you. I very much see the media landscape as a wasteland -- a place of little to no intrinsic value. I have no respect for it and have since vacated it.
Should a tornado head my way, I would rather die a saint's death than humor one more damned joke on the internet. You can quote that!
My gut is always to mash reply, then I remember I pay and can have my silly ideas read by others!
This is wonderful -- though a bit unsettling read. One of the ways that I often work to distill or reduce technology into graspable pieces is to think of the offline (un-tech!) ways that folks used to do what the "high-tech" thing does. For your coronavirus research, it seems to me like you're putting too much stock in silly people. For one, there are no responsible voices on Twitter (I will not work to defend this claim right now) -- if they were responsible, they wouldn't waste their time there. So to originate proper research on Twitter, Facebook, Reddit, or even aggregated news sites seems like an effort in self-delusion. Why not stick to trusted sources like the CDC, WHO, or countless others that provide pretty boring but true information? Granted, I am lucky that I am married to a brilliant scientist who knows everything there is to about epidemiology.
Hopefully I'm tugging at some of your own apprehensions in the writing as opposed to dunking on you. I very much see the media landscape as a wasteland -- a place of little to no intrinsic value. I have no respect for it and have since vacated it.
Should a tornado head my way, I would rather die a saint's death than humor one more damned joke on the internet. You can quote that!
MM