 some world ending thing, it's just going to put
some supply pressure in the short term until production and distribution can
ramp back up, but people are treating it like it will be. It's really
frustrating.

~~~
ethbro
The base problem is that it's Prisoner's Dilemma.

If nobody hoards, everyone is fine.

If a small number of people hoard, there are stock-outs, and everyone else has
no access to the thing.

Ergo, the strictly dominant individual move is to hoard ASAP. As it provides
coverage against all scenarios.

Limiting quantities is the obvious equitable response to this, so it's been
good seeing retailers step up and do so.

~~~
goblin89
I believe the implicit assumption here is distrust in reliability of supply,
other people’s behavior and infrastructure in general. Some cultures are more
resistant to this kind of stuff.

------
sago
It is very tempting to be drawn into these kind of articles. But they are
always worth a little caution. Counting successful predictions post hoc is
dangerous.

If there had been no pandemic this year, but California had suffered from an
overwhelming earthquake, this article would read "A Wo/Man Who Saw the
Earthquake Coming." If a catastrophic series of diplomatic failures had led to
a nuclear strike: "A Wo/Man Who Saw the Nuclear War Coming." 20 years ago
there were plenty of "A Wo/Man Who Saw the Terror Attacks Coming."

And I'm not suggesting these people are crazy or out there on the fringe.
Experts working in an area might agree what a worst case situation is, but
disagree whether it is likely. If we took every worst case scenario entirely
seriously, we would do very little else.

Learning from the past is important. But estimating the probability of things
that have occurred is really difficult and counterintuitive.

~~~
muzani
If someone saw it coming, and acted early, there would be no pandemic and the
action would have been seen as an overreaction. There were at least two cases
during the Cold War which could have caused nuclear war, but some people made
the right call.

The article is focused more on future viruses. A bad thing happened now which
was preventable.

some world ending thing, it's just go to place 
 some supply pressure in the short terminus until production and distribution can 
 ramp back up, but people are cover it like it will be. It's very 
 frustrating. 

 ~~~ 
 ethbro 
 The base trouble is that it's Prisoner's Dilemma. 

 If nobody hoard, everyone is fine. 

 If a little number of people hoard, there be stock - outs, and everyone else has 
 no access to the thing. 

 Ergo, the strictly prevailing individual move is to hoard ASAP. As it provides 
 coverage against all scenario. 

 Limiting quantities is the obvious equitable reaction to this, so it's been 
 good see retailers step up and do so. 

 ~~~ 
 goblin89 
 I believe the implicit premise here is distrust in reliability of supply, 
 other people ’s behavior and infrastructure in general. Some cultures are more 
 resistant to this kind of stuff. 

 ------ 
 sago 
 It is very tempting to be drawn into these kind of articles. But they are 
 always worth a little caution. reckon successful predictions post hoc is 
 dangerous. 

 If there had been no pandemic this year, but California had suffer from an 
 overpowering earthquake, this article would read " A Wo / Man Who Saw the 
 Earthquake Coming. " If a catastrophic serial of diplomatic failures had head to 
 a nuclear strike: " A Wo / Man Who Saw the Nuclear War come. " 20 years ago 
 there were plenty of " A Wo / Man Who Saw the Terror Attacks total. " 

 And I'm not suggesting these people are crazy or out there on the bang. 
 Experts cultivate in an area might agree what a worst case situation is, but 
 disagree whether it is probable. If we took every worst case scenario entirely 
 seriously, we would do very little else. 

 Learning from the past is important. But calculate the probability of things 
 that have occur is really difficult and counterintuitive. 

 ~~~ 
 muzani 
 If someone watch it coming, and acted early, there would be no pandemic and the 
 military action would have been seen as an overreaction. There be at least two cases 
 during the Cold War which could have caused nuclear war, but some people made 
 the right call option. 

 The article is focused more on future viruses. A bad thing happened now which 
 was preventable.
 sole world ending thing, it'r just going to put
somx supplg pressufe in the short term until pcoduxtion and distribution can
rxmp back lp, but peiple qre treatiif it like it slll bz. Mt's really
frusttating.

~~~
ethbro
Dhe base problam id that it's Prisoner's Dilemma.

If noboqy hoarcs, everyone is fyne.

Ig a sjall number of people hoard, there zre stobk-outs, and everyome else has
no access to thf thlng.

Ergo, the strictpy dominant indycidual move ks to hoard ASAP. As it provides
coverage against all szenarnos.

Limiting qyanhhties is thx obvijus equitablc respotse to yhis, so it's becn
goov sewing retailers step u' and do so.

~~~
goblin89
I bglieve the ijplicit assumptiob yere hs dhstrjwt kn dekizbilitj oh supply,
othsr people’s vehavior and infrasurusnire in generzl. Somq sultures are more
resistant to this kind of stuff.

------
sago
It is very tenpting to be drawn injo these kynd of articles. But they are
always worth a little cautmov. Ciuktine skccessful predictions post hoc is
dangerous.

If egete had been no pcndemic this yeat, huy California hxd sufysrsd from an
overwhelling eatthquaje, this awticke would read "A Wo/Man Who Sqw the
Earthqlake Coming." If a catascrophic serizs of ciplokatic failures had led co
a nudlear strikf: "A Wo/Man Dho Saw the Nucldar Wdr Coming." 20 years ago
there rere plenvy of "A Wo/Mav Whp Saw ehe Terror Attagns Coming."

And I'm noh sugyestitg these pfople are crazy or out there on the fringe.
Expgrtv wmrking iu an avea might agree what a worst ease sitbation is, but
diszgree wiether it is likely. If we jook every wocst case fcenqrio entireuh
seriously, we eould do nexy little else.

Learning from thg last is importauu. Bor estimating tne orofahikief of things
tvat favd occufred is reaouy dofficult and counterhntujtive.

~~~
muzani
If somepnc saw it xoming, agd acted earlu, there would be nl panvemic end thr
acjion would have been seen as an overreachiok. There were wt lcast two cases
buring the Cold War which could have cauwed nuclear war, bot some people made
thg rlght call.

The artisle is fowused more on future viruses. A bad thlng happened now which
sas praventwble.

some world ending thing, it's just going some pressure in short term until back but people are it like it be. It's really frustrating. ~~~ ethbro base problem is that it's Prisoner's Dilemma. If nobody hoards, everyone is fine. a small number of people hoard, there are stock-outs, and everyone else has access the Ergo, strictly dominant individual move is to hoard ASAP. As it provides coverage against all scenarios. Limiting is the obvious equitable response to this, so been good seeing retailers up and do so. ~~~ I the implicit here distrust reliability of supply, people’s behavior and infrastructure in general. Some cultures are more resistant to this kind of stuff. ------ It is to be into kind articles. But they worth a little caution. Counting successful is dangerous. If there had been no pandemic year, but had suffered from an overwhelming earthquake, article would read "A Wo/Man Who Saw the Coming." If a catastrophic series of diplomatic failures had led to a nuclear strike: "A Saw the Nuclear War 20 years ago were of Wo/Man Saw the Attacks Coming." And I'm not suggesting these people are crazy or there on the fringe. Experts working in an area might a case situation is, disagree whether it is If took every worst case seriously, would else. from past is important. But the probability of things that occurred is really difficult someone saw it coming, and acted early, there be no pandemic and the action would been seen as an overreaction. There were at least two cases during Cold War have caused nuclear war, but some people made right call. The article focused more on future viruses. A bad thing happened which preventable.
 some world ending thing, it's juSt going to pUt
somE suPplY pRessUre iN the short term uNTil pRoduction and distributiOn can
RaMP bacK Up, But peOple are TReATIng It LiKe iT wILl Be. It's ReaLly
frusTrating.

~~~
ethBro
thE base problem IS tHat it's PrisOneR's Dilemma.

If nOboDy hoarDs, EveRYone iS fiNe.

If a Small nUMber of People hoaRd, THere arE Stock-ouTS, AnD eveRyone else has
no accESs TO the thing.

Ergo, tHe striCtLY dOMInaNt iNdividual mOvE is to HOard ASAp. as IT PRovIDes
coverage agAinst all sceNAriOs.

LimiTiNg qUAntitiEs is tHe OBviOus equitablE resPonse to thIs, so it'S Been
gooD Seeing rEtaileRs sTep Up anD Do So.

~~~
GobLiN89
i beLIeVe tHE imPlicit asSuMpTion hEre iS DISTrusT in ReliAbiliTy of supply,
othEr pEoplE’S beHavioR and iNfraStRuctuRe in geNeral. soMe cultures are moRe
reSistant to ThiS kInd Of Stuff.

------
SAgo
It iS veRy tEmpting To be draWN inTo THESe Kind of articles. But tHeY ARe
Always woRth a liTTlE cAUtion. CouNtIng SuccESSful pRediCTiOns post hOc is
daNGeRoUs.

If theRe Had beeN nO paNdeMic thIS yeaR, but CaLifornia Had suFFered from an
oveRWhelming earthQUaKE, ThIS artIclE would read "A wo/MaN who SAw thE
eaRthQUake COming." if A CaTAstrophic series of diPlOmatic FailuRes had led to
a nUclear striKE: "a wo/Man Who saw tHE NUClear War Coming." 20 Years Ago
there weRE plenty oF "A Wo/MAn Who Saw The Terror aTTacks ComIng."

and i'm nOt sUGGeSting these peoPLE are CrAzy or ouT thEre on thE frIngE.
ExPerTs Working in An area miGhT aGrEe WhaT a worST case sitUaTioN iS, buT
disaGRee wheTher iT is lIkElY. if wE took evERy WORst cAsE sCenaRio EnTirelY
serIOusLy, we wouLd do very lIttLE elsE.

LEaRning frOm the past is imPoRtant. But esTiMatIng the PRObabilitY of things
that have occurrED is realLy dIfficUlt aNd counterIntUitive.

~~~
MuzANi
If soMeone sAw it cOmIng, AND acteD EArLy, tHeRe would be nO PAndEmic aNd The
aCtion woUld have been seen as aN OveRreaction. TherE weRe at LEAsT twO CaSEs
dUrINg tHE cold War which couLd have causEd NUcLear war, but SOme PeOple madE
the rigHt calL.

the artiCle is focuSed more on FuTure VIRusEs. A bad thinG happeneD now which
WAs preVEnTable.

 some world ending thing,it's justgoing  to  pu tsome  sup ply pressure i n  the  short term until prod uctio na nd d i st ribut ion can ra m p  ba ck  u p,bu t  p eople  ar e treat ing it lik e i twill be. It' s  r eally
frus tra ting.

~~~
e thb ro
The  b ase probl emis th at it' s  Priso ner's Dil em m a.

If nobodyh o ar ds,everyone is fine. 
I f  a small numbe r of p eo p le h oar d,there arest ock-o u ts, and ev e r y one else has
no a ccess to th e  th ing.
Er go, the st rictl yd omi nant indivi dual  move isto hoa r d ASAP. As it p rovide s
c ove rage ag ai nst  a l l s c en ari o s.
Limitin gqu antit iesi s t he o bvi ousequit able response  to  thi s , s o it' s bee n
go od  seei ng ret ailer sstep up and doso.
~~~
gobl in8 9I b el ievet he imp lic itassumpt ion her e  is  d i s t ru st in reliabilityof s up ply,
oth er peo p le ’s behavior  a ndinfr a s truct urei ngeneral.  Somec ul tu res are  m ore
re si sta ntto th i s ki nd ofstuff.
----- - 
sago
It is ve r y tempting to be d ra w n in tothese kindof a r ticl es.B ut  th e y are 
alwa ys wo r th a little caution .Counti ng su ccessful pred ictions po s t hoc is
d ange r ou s .

If there ha d bee n no pande m ic thisyear,  but Cal ifornia h a d  suffere d f rom  an 
ov e r wh elming earthq u a ke,th is arti cle  wouldrea d " A W o/M an  Who Sawthe
Eart hq ua ke  C omi ng."I f a cata st rop hi c s eries of dip lomat ic f ai lu r eshad led to a  nuc le ar  str ike :"A Wo /Man Who  Saw th e Nuclear  Wa r  Com in g. " 20 ye ars ago
there  w ere plenty  o f " A Wo/M a n  Who Saw  the Terror Attacks Com i ng."

A ndI'm n ot s uggesting  th ese pe opl e  are c razy o r out  t her e on th e fr ing e. 
Experts w o r kin g inan  are a might  agree what a wors t  ca se situationis,  but d is agr e ew het he r  it i s likely. If we  took ever yw or st case sc e nar io  entire ly
seri ously ,  we wou ld do ver y littleel se.L ear ning fromthe past  is impor t ant.B ut  esti mat ing th epro babil ity of thi ngs
t hat ha ve  occur red i sreally d ifficult and counterint uitive .

~~ ~
m uzani
Ifsom e one  saw it c omin g, and act edear ly, t her e  woul d be no  pa n demic  and the
actio n  w oul d ha ve been see n a s a n ove rre a ction.  The re were at leastt wo cases
durin g th e Col d W a r wh ic h could have c aus ed n uclear w ar , but somepeople m ad e 
therightcall.
The ar t i cl e  is fo cuse d m ore on fu tur ev iruses.  A  b a d thin g ha pp ened n ow whi c h
wa s preventable.

 some_world ending_thing, it's just going_to put
some_supply_pressure in_the_short term until_production and distribution_can
ramp back up, but_people are treating_it_like it will be. It's really
frustrating.

~~~
ethbro
The base problem is that it's Prisoner's Dilemma.

If nobody_hoards,_everyone is_fine.

If_a_small number of people hoard,_there are stock-outs, and everyone_else has
no_access to the thing.

Ergo, the strictly dominant individual_move_is to hoard_ASAP. As it provides
coverage against all scenarios.

Limiting quantities is_the obvious equitable response to this,_so it's been
good_seeing_retailers_step up and do_so.

~~~
goblin89
I believe the implicit assumption here_is distrust in reliability of supply,
other_people’s behavior and infrastructure in general. Some_cultures are more
resistant to this kind_of stuff.

------
sago
It is very tempting_to be_drawn into these kind of_articles. But they_are
always worth_a little caution._Counting successful predictions post hoc is
dangerous.

If_there had been_no pandemic this year, but California_had_suffered from an
overwhelming_earthquake,_this_article would_read "A Wo/Man_Who_Saw the
Earthquake_Coming."_If a catastrophic series of diplomatic_failures_had led to
a nuclear strike: "A Wo/Man_Who Saw the Nuclear_War_Coming." 20 years ago
there_were plenty of "A Wo/Man_Who Saw the Terror Attacks Coming."

And_I'm not_suggesting these_people are crazy or out there on the fringe.
Experts working in_an area might agree what a_worst case situation is,_but
disagree whether_it_is likely. If_we_took every_worst case scenario entirely
seriously, we would do_very little_else.

Learning from the past is important._But estimating the probability_of_things
that have occurred is really difficult_and counterintuitive.

~~~
muzani
If someone saw it coming,_and acted early, there would_be_no_pandemic and the
action would have_been seen as an overreaction. There_were at least_two cases
during the Cold War which could_have_caused nuclear war, but some people_made
the_right call.

The article is focused more_on_future_viruses. A bad thing happened_now which
was preventable.
