Offside Chat Archives (2014-2021)

ambertinker41 said:https://www.popcorngarage.com/

A little easy... I tracked down all 13 right away.

EDIT:
14? They did a pretty decent job hiding Top Gun.

Happy Maundy Thursday to you and Vince. I know how much this day means to you and how much you value these traditions.
A little bunny popped up and said something kind to me, so I figured I'd pass it along.
Since I'm feeling the good vibes today, I wanted to share some of that joy and wish you a very happy Maundy Thursday!

Jessica Gonzalez said:It’s probably impossible to measure mortality accurately, and it can't be a single universal number because the disease hits older people much harder. You can see this in daily death reports—even without official statistics, it's clear that while infections happen across all age groups, the elderly and those with underlying conditions make up most of the fatalities. Every country or region has its own demographic quirks. For example, Italy or the US tends to have an older population with many people over 65, whereas African nations usually have high birth rates and a very young population. Plus, it depends on the season; the virus and the human body react differently at -10 degrees versus +35. So, statistics from Italy compared to, say, Nigeria might look completely different. To build solid, large-scale statistics, you need a lot of time; these real-time tallies aren't really reliable by any standard. Studies from Heinsberg or Iceland are trying to find the bigger picture, but they feel more like surveys than comprehensive research. It takes years to get a clearer view, though these studies already suggest we won't see 10% of the world's population die if they catch it. However, if the virus hits a nursing home where everyone is 80+, the mortality rate in that isolated sample could hit 100% if everything goes wrong. I wrote a little while ago, maybe a few weeks back, that the baseline annual mortality rate in the USA is 1.4%. That means just by breathing and walking around, there's a 1.4% chance you'll pass away this year for some reason (which is a pretty grim statistic and not exactly a highlight for the US). But since everyone is lumped together, it's obvious more seniors will die this year than young people. If research shows the cumulative mortality of corona is around half a percent, and that overlaps with that 1.4% baseline, then we should carefully look at how many deaths occur in the US by the end of the year and whether corona actually significantly changes the overall stats. We can debate all we want, but some of these seniors might have passed away later this year from something else anyway. Not everyone, of course, but it wouldn't be zero. Over the last 15 years, the number of deaths in the US has hovered between 50,000 and 54,000 annually. For this disease to truly justify shutting down the entire system and wrecking the economy and quality of life, it would need to add at least an extra 10,000 deaths per year—something we can't even know for sure if it would have happened without restrictions (since that's not how we proceeded). Back in early 2015, we had a very harsh winter, and that year saw nearly 4,000 more deaths than the previous two, yet nobody shut down the economy for that. On the other hand, we shouldn't deny the numbers from Bergamo; the truth is likely somewhere in the middle that no one has found yet. Governments worldwide are making decisions on the fly. Whether they implement strict measures or none at all, it's all guesswork, and above all, these are political decisions. Maybe save that bolded part in your bookmarks or set it as your phone wallpaper. Everything we are seeing consists of political decisions, not scientific ones. Healthcare funding is a political decision, building or not building a hospital is a political decision, quarantine is a political decision, the Immunology Institute is a political decision, and having Beroš instead of Kujundžić is a political decision, too.

I'm not entirely sure about the exact accuracy of this claim, so I'd probably need to look it up, but in the movie >, the character played by > mentions that every single percentage point increase in the US unemployment rate leads to an extra 40,000 deaths. Since unemployment jumped from 3.5% to over 10%, I guess you can do the math on what that implies. We're talking about hunger, homelessness, substance abuse, alcoholism, poor nutrition, domestic violence, stress, and so on. Millions of people might end up facing those struggles, which is pretty heavy. Maybe that's why > was being so careful with his moves? Their economy seems to move faster—it recovers quickly, but it can also crash just as fast. A house might be worth a million dollars one day and only 100,000 the next.

New York City reportedly has about 80,000 homeless individuals. Out of that number, how many are actually registered with the labor office? Or rather, how many have simply given up on the system entirely and are sleeping on cardboard in some alleyway?
The spike in initial jobless claims officially only tells us that everything has ground to a halt... it says nothing about how many jobs will truly be destroyed in the long run.

Someone is still stuck in campaign mode, and Americans always love a pretty story and a happy ending.

24.03.2020

09.04.2020

Once every single active case is officially moved to the closed column, we might actually face the reality that the mortality rate is north of 10%.
Of course, that’s assuming we aren't ignoring all the unregistered cases.

Matthew Young35 said:Once every single active case is officially moved to the closed column, we might actually face the reality that the mortality rate is north of 10%.
Of course, that’s assuming we aren't ignoring all the unregistered cases.

If they start mass testing for antibodies, we'll get a decent idea of the actual infection numbers.

My bet? Global mortality won't top 1%.

Anthony Jackson2 said:If they start mass testing for antibodies, we'll get a decent idea of the actual infection numbers.

My bet? Global mortality won't top 1%.

I have no clue what the final mortality rate will actually be, but if it hits 1%, that is a terrifying figure.
If the death rate is really that high, then all this chaos everyone is causing is more than justified.

By the way, is there any way to download and play FM 20 somewhere without using Steam?

Paul Martinez73 said:By the way, is there any way to download and play FM 20 somewhere without using Steam?

I’ve already blown my budget for the year.
It looks like there isn't a cracked version available.

EDIT:
Seems like I was right...
https://crackwatch.com/game/football-manager-2020

Thugs

Paul Martinez73 said:Thugs

I wouldn't say so. It seems to me they're leaning much more heavily into marketing the Premier League than La Liga.

Anthony Jackson2 said:If they start mass testing for antibodies, we'll get a decent idea of the actual infection numbers.

My bet? Global mortality won't top 1%.

Dude, 1% would mean 70 million people—that's just not happening. We won't even see a million deaths.

https://ourworldindata.org/births-and-deaths

I read a bit when I can. That's about it.

Back in 2015, 57 million people passed away.

Let's put this into perspective.

This year, we'll see the usual number of deaths predicted—assuming that number climbs as the population grows—minus whoever caught COVID before they died.
The rest don't matter; we wouldn't want them messing up the statistics for the biggest modern epidemic on Earth.

This virus is just one catalyst. Every virus and bacterium is dangerous to the elderly with chronic conditions. Then you have those tiny outliers—the "young" or "healthy" cases that always make the news for the sake of a headline.

Ashley Bailey6 said:https://ourworldindata.org/births-and-deaths

I read a bit when I can. That's about it.

Back in 2015, 57 million people passed away.

Let's put this into perspective.

This year, we'll see the usual number of deaths predicted—assuming that number climbs as the population grows—minus whoever caught COVID before they died.
The rest don't matter; we wouldn't want them messing up the statistics for the biggest modern epidemic on Earth.

This virus is just one catalyst. Every virus and bacterium is dangerous to the elderly with chronic conditions. Then you have those tiny outliers—the "young" or "healthy" cases that always make the news for the sake of a headline.

How do you view the way human life expectancy increases over time?
Is it through the lens of "well, they were going to die eventually anyway," or by actively preventing the cause that triggered the death?

Sure, plenty of people caught this virus and died while already terminally ill... but does it really not matter whether they die now or in two, four, or twenty years? For them, it certainly matters.
There are certain illnesses we simply cannot fight, like various cancers, but against this nonsense, we actually have a fighting chance if we exercise some discipline.
Why not show a little discipline and extend someone's life by a few years? Even if it means missing out on a trip to Malibu?

And let's not even get started on the absurdity of claiming this might not mutate into something far more insane, given how little we actually know about this virus.

The world has become a global village. Today, it costs very little for someone to fly to the other side of the planet.
We are facing epidemiological threats unlike anything in history because mobility has never been at this level. Viruses have never spread this effortlessly.

At worst, we are looking at a drastic shift in our lifestyles.

God knows I am a passionate craft beer enthusiast, but I am managing—I'm even getting used to life without them. You can still get alcohol poisoning at home, after all.
Perhaps everything truly will be reset.

Ultimately, it comes down to this: how much comfort are we willing and able to sacrifice so that someone else might live for one more year, or even just one more week?

People usually say that prolonging life is just prolonging the agony.
Emotionally and financially.
In terms of time and energy.
Looking at it rationally.

It’s all just to keep the working population locked up for who knows how long.
All of us younger people—not necessarily young, just active—are losing chunks of our lives. We're being robbed of experiences, not just right now, but for everything that comes next.

Ashley Bailey6 said:People usually say that prolonging life is just prolonging the agony.
Emotionally and financially.
In terms of time and energy.
Looking at it rationally.

It’s all just to keep the working population locked up for who knows how long.
All of us younger people—not necessarily young, just active—are losing chunks of our lives. We're being robbed of experiences, not just right now, but for everything that comes next.

Try explaining that to the people who actually need to pass away.

Just walk up and tell them, "Hey, could you please die so I don't miss out on everything life has to offer?"

I'm sure your grandmother would just slap you upside the head and say, "Oh, you sweet child, fine, I'll go ahead and die so you don't have to suffer for my sake."

Matthew Young35 said:Try explaining that to the people who actually need to pass away.

Just walk up and tell them, "Hey, could you please die so I don't miss out on everything life has to offer?"

I'm sure your grandmother would just slap you upside the head and say, "Oh, you sweet child, fine, I'll go ahead and die so you don't have to suffer for my sake."

Who's saying Grandma is definitely going to die or even catch it?
And who's saying she won't pass before someone else does?

Because of that 5%, everyone else stays alive, but they aren't really living. They're just waiting for the hard times predicted in every projection.

You don't have to judge immediately. Just look at it from another perspective.

Ashley Bailey6 said:Who's saying Grandma is definitely going to die or even catch it?
And who's saying she won't pass before someone else does?

Because of that 5%, everyone else stays alive, but they aren't really living. They're just waiting for the hard times predicted in every projection.

You don't have to judge immediately. Just look at it from another perspective.

Well, someone dies. That's just how it goes.

There’s a story by Ursula K. Le Guin, if I recall correctly.
It's called The Ones Who Walk Away from... damn it, I can't remember the name of the city they left.
Anyway, read it. It’s quite instructive regarding this situation and your specific way of thinking.

EDIT:
The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas

Stozer is such a joke. Now that stores can stay open later, damn, COVID-19 is a true believer, and he’s gonna spend these next two days just chilling at home 😁