I'm going to start a thread on global first reported #COVID19 cases. Things to look out for: Date, location, demographics, stage, visible vs invisible world (tourists go to the doctor, supply chain workers don't), indicators of fast spread (many reports in diff locations). 👇
SOUTH KOREA: 20 Jan, Chinese woman, Incheon, hospitalization; nice table and dynamic map, early cases NW then SW, current center Daego is in the SE. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coro…
GERMANY: 27 Jan, Starnberg, Bavaria, Webasto employee, finally a first case from the industrial world; there is a nice dynamic map, this was all over Germany in a flash. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coro…
JAPAN: 10-15 Jan, Chinese national, Kanagawa, hospitalization, direct contact with Wuhan. Many more direct contacts with Wuhan in January. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2020_coro…
I'm mildly amused about the commentariat drawing up Harberger triangles from Econ 101 to "show" that Trump's tariffs are "bad for the economy". That's literally demonstrating that they haven't learned anything new over the last 30 years – or even the last five. /1
Trump has been pretty blunt that he sees the US offshoring its extraction and manufacturing base (its industry for short) as a fatal strategic blunder that sits at the heart of its declining role in the global theater, and that he intends to reverse this. /2
A strategic blunder shared among all administrations of the Reagan-to-Obama era, and the oft-forgotten key element of Trump's political ascendancy was that he pushed the Republican "country club" establishment aside before he did the same with the Democrats. /3
As a pretty good rule of thumb, you can think of the political travails of most Western economies as a rearguard of an increasingly washed-out center against encroaching, increasingly doctrinary challenges from left and right, with the doctrinary left holding a terrain advantage.
The end of the Hotelling era as I call it, or more popularly, the end of the Merkel era. Left behind by most of the credentialed class that happily moved over to the left-doctrinary camp there's a smattering of hold-outs in the center who cling to dear life for nostalgic reasons.
There's on an abstract level some justification for it. The functioning of a nation state critically depends on an orderly transfer of power, something only a Hotelling competition over the ideological center (the famous "median voter") can provide.
Emerging public discussion in 🇩🇪 that the internal debate of the German health office @rki_de didn't match the political pronouncements, centering on 17 March 2020 and the call to increase Covid hazard level from "moderate" to "high".
A good opportunity to recapitulate...
...the biggest mistakes that drove the response to the pandemic.
1⃣ The perpetual lack of recognition that we were observing events that had occurred weeks before, and the refusal to account for this.
What exactly happened on March 17? Nothing much in terms of the spread. /2
Like most other countries, Germany started to expand testing rapidly, leading to a massive increase in cumulative numbers, dramatically visualized in dashboards and charts.
But the rate of positive tests (MPC in my nomenclature) stayed mostly the same thru March. /3
The German health authority @rki_de has evaluated the efficacy of pandemic restrictions it supported, and unsurprisingly it awarded itself a good grade. Overall everything worked out quite well, it says. We looked under the hood and found some surprises. A thread (🇩🇪 below). /1
For starters, in order to show that an intervention had a hypothesized causal effect, a study has to be able to reject the null hypothesis. The null hypothesis generically says that the observed curved, with its ups and downs, was not caused by the hypothesized factors. /2
To reject the null hypothesis in a setting like this, a study has to show two things: that an effect happened after an intervention ("post hoc"), and that it happened because of the intervention ("propter hoc"). The RKI study ignores the first and fails at the second. /3
I was asked to elaborate on why this claim is nonsense, so a good opportunity to summarize a few things I wrote about game theory, machine learning, and Silicon Valley over the years.
Exhibit 1. A short clip on just how much Silicon Valley runs on game theoretic concepts, in many cases decades adopted decades after they had been invented and languished in obscurity. link.medium.com/wtm0D49zqwb
Hal Varian crossing the SF Bay to bring the "new", game-theory derived Industrial Organization to the Silicon Valley tech companies might've been just as much of a historical juncture as Michel Porter crossing the Charles River from Harvard Econ to HBS.
A book a day on the Cold War era development of cybernetics, game theory, information science, and operations research: histories, biographies, autobiographies.
Day 1. Age of System: Understanding the Development of Modern Social Science by Hunter Heyck. play.google.com/store/books/de…
Day 2 in the history of cybernetics etc. Rise of the Machines: the lost history of cybernetics by Thomas Rid. play.google.com/store/books/de…