Formerly DT: COVID-19 - Featuring Lots of Politics, now CR because political talk not going away

[Pato del Muerto 53460]

8 minutes ago, bolverk said:

I read the news.

There have been plans for decades. Actually, implementing those plans is another matter and leads to a political discussion, which I'd prefer to refrain from in this thread. You're welcome to assert that stance and pose the quoted question elsewhere.

The only way to know if the plan will work is to execute it. This is the first bug that has truly engaged the entire plan into motion. Errors and omissions have to be assumed, and hopefully the plan will change for the better so that next time it has enhanced performance.  This is all assuming that the plan exists independent of political shenanigans, which it probably cannot just for funding reasons. 

[Skipper 6411]

7 minutes ago, MNLonghornFUKM said:

Kinda like a roller coaster.. this mornings reporting is larger than every day since about 3/28


At least it’s not doubling.. yet

Right.  I know that area is testing way more than everyone else but I haven't followed closely enough to get a sense at all as to what parameters are there and what the lag time is.  But I'm certainly not aware of any data point that would make it seem like there is a good chance of death rate slowing anytime soon.  I think it's going to be an extremely ugly 2 weeks there.  And unfortunately I think we'll see the same in a handful of other places over the course of April.

[Pancho 46288]

Gupta on CNN now saying we need a nationwide stay at home order today and it needs to go on until the end of May.  He noted that even at the end of May, it would probably still need to be evaluated again to see if it should be lifted. 

[StruggleBus 3922]

12 minutes ago, EuroHorn said:

Anyone been Zoom bombed ?

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/03/826129520/a-must-for-millions-zoom-has-a-dark-side-and-an-fbi-warning
 

 

There are some very simple privacy settings that will prevent this. I doubt that will be understood by the mass influx of new users though. 

[LABEVO 928]

3 hours ago, Don Johnson said:

I don’t understand what the two have to do with each other. If it was spread rate vs transit, that maybe makes sense. But death rate?  That’s going to be based off a different demographic. 
 

Southern Louisiana, for example, has a ton of obesity, diabetes, and it hit old folk’s home hard. Not to mention, they hosted Mardis Gras, Spring Break, St Paddy’s Day, numerous conventions, docking of cruises, and tourism. 

None of which has anything to do with driving in a car alone. 

Because testing is limited and we aren't truly capturing everyone who has the virus, there is an argument that death rate is a better way to understand how policy is working or isn't. 

[Captainant 28519]

5 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Btw, public service announcement for everyone, do not click on links in Zoom chat. There is a pretty nasty vulnerability that will let folks get access to your system (or your work network). 

https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2020/04/unpatched-zoom-bug-lets-attackers-steal-windows-credentials-with-no-warning/

Also PSA, Zoom has a shitload of security vulnerabilities and you shouldn't use an email associated with an organization or domain group when registering due to contact and photo sharing functionality that they built in before it went big. Some of their bugs are real fuckin bad, especially considering that judicial proceedings and privileged/confidential communications are flowing across it

1

CVE-2019-13567

20

Exec Code

2019-07-12

2019-08-30

6.8

None

Remote

Medium

Not required

Partial

Partial

Partial

The Zoom Client before 4.4.53932.0709 on macOS allows remote code execution, a different vulnerability than CVE-2019-13450. If the ZoomOpener daemon (aka the hidden web server) is running, but the Zoom Client is not installed or can't be opened, an attacker can remotely execute code with a maliciously crafted launch URL. NOTE: ZoomOpener is removed by the Apple Malware Removal Tool (MRT) if this tool is enabled and has the 2019-07-10 MRTConfigData.

2

CVE-2019-13450

284

2019-07-09

2019-07-16

4.3

None

Remote

Medium

Not required

Partial

None

None

In the Zoom Client through 4.4.4 and RingCentral 7.0.136380.0312 on macOS, remote attackers can force a user to join a video call with the video camera active. This occurs because any web site can interact with the Zoom web server on localhost port 19421 or 19424. NOTE: a machine remains vulnerable if the Zoom Client was installed in the past and then uninstalled. Blocking exploitation requires additional steps, such as the ZDisableVideo preference and/or killing the web server, deleting the ~/.zoomus directory, and creating a ~/.zoomus plain file.

3

CVE-2018-15715

20

2018-11-30

2019-10-09

7.5

None

Remote

Low

Not required

Partial

Partial

Partial

Zoom clients on Windows (before version 4.1.34814.1119), Mac OS (before version 4.1.34801.1116), and Linux (2.4.129780.0915 and below) are vulnerable to unauthorized message processing. A remote unauthenticated attacker can spoof UDP messages from a meeting attendee or Zoom server in order to invoke functionality in the target client. This allows the attacker to remove attendees from meetings, spoof messages from users, or hijack shared screens.

4

CVE-2014-5811

310

+Info

2014-09-09

2014-09-20

5.4

None

Local Network

Medium

Not required

Partial

Partial

Partial

The ZOOM Cloud Meetings (aka us.zoom.videomeetings) application @7F060008 for Android does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13726]

1 hour ago, UT_OB1 said:

So no actual data on admissions or ICU stays. The “jump in admissions” is just a few nurses s sources. And the officials they quote say we have plenty of space still. So click bait?  At least give some actual sourced data if the claim is going to be made

I don't know why county or city officials do not report this info as they definitely have it, and it wouldn't seem to violate privacy laws as it doesn't remotely identify individuals. My guess is that they don't want to cause panic, or allow internet sleuths to run with the numbers to ultimately create panic.

With my job, I've been told some numbers from one hospital system that suggest it's ridiculous to think the Houston area only has 1000 positive COVID cases. I also hate it when someone posts about knowing something and not telling but I'm not risking my job in this environment.

[Shaggybevo 353]

13 minutes ago, EuroHorn said:

Anyone been Zoom bombed ?

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/03/826129520/a-must-for-millions-zoom-has-a-dark-side-and-an-fbi-warning
 

 

According to CNBC article:

“Our product development team is largely based in China, where personnel costs are less expensive than in many other jurisdictions,” Zoom wrote in a regulatory filing

So that may help explain low security standards.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/26/zoom-key-profit-driver-ahead-of-ipo-engineers-in-china.html

[dcar00 14947]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Nope. https://www.phe.gov/about/sns/Pages/default.aspx

 

 

good stuff. didn't know the stockpile was specifically for the states.  thanks for the link.

[bolverk 30320]

The NYTimes has a treasure-trove of data on countries, the US, individual states, and all the counties with tables and heat maps. Especially useful are the county tables with a little bar next to them color-coded by the growth rate where you can see whether things are heating up or cooling off. I think the paywall has been lifted from all of this. 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-cases.html

 

 

 

[GRHorn 105]

1 hour ago, Message Board User said:

 

I think if it was some silver bullet, it would’ve already shown it. We’re not the first country using it. 

[freyguy 4368]

1 hour ago, Lobo said:

Only two things we have going for us in terms of college football is that September is still hot as hell in most of the country.  And UT athletics is already looking into playing the games with no fans, just TV crews and officials.  

and evidence is suggesting that this virus doesnt give much fucks about the heat.

[GRHorn 105]

15 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I don't know why county or city officials do not report this info as they definitely have it, and it wouldn't seem to violate privacy laws as it doesn't remotely identify individuals. My guess is that they don't want to cause panic, or allow internet sleuths to run with the numbers to ultimately create panic.

With my job, I've been told some numbers from one hospital system that suggest it's ridiculous to think the Houston area only has 1000 positive COVID cases. I also hate it when someone posts about knowing something and not telling but I'm not risking my job in this environment.

I know for fact that inpatient Covid/Puis in SA was essentially the same on 4/1 as 3/26. The ICU pts are a higher proportion of the total, but otherwise unchanged. Take from that what you will. 

Edited April 3, 2020 by GRHorn

[Dahobbs 18305]

16 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Also PSA, Zoom has a shitload of security vulnerabilities and you shouldn't use an email associated with an organization or domain group when registering due to contact and photo sharing functionality that they built in before it went big. Some of their bugs are real fuckin bad, especially considering that judicial proceedings and privileged/confidential communications are flowing across it

1

CVE-2019-13567

20

Exec Code

2019-07-12

2019-08-30

6.8

None

Remote

Medium

Not required

Partial

Partial

Partial

The Zoom Client before 4.4.53932.0709 on macOS allows remote code execution, a different vulnerability than CVE-2019-13450. If the ZoomOpener daemon (aka the hidden web server) is running, but the Zoom Client is not installed or can't be opened, an attacker can remotely execute code with a maliciously crafted launch URL. NOTE: ZoomOpener is removed by the Apple Malware Removal Tool (MRT) if this tool is enabled and has the 2019-07-10 MRTConfigData.

2

CVE-2019-13450

284

2019-07-09

2019-07-16

4.3

None

Remote

Medium

Not required

Partial

None

None

In the Zoom Client through 4.4.4 and RingCentral 7.0.136380.0312 on macOS, remote attackers can force a user to join a video call with the video camera active. This occurs because any web site can interact with the Zoom web server on localhost port 19421 or 19424. NOTE: a machine remains vulnerable if the Zoom Client was installed in the past and then uninstalled. Blocking exploitation requires additional steps, such as the ZDisableVideo preference and/or killing the web server, deleting the ~/.zoomus directory, and creating a ~/.zoomus plain file.

3

CVE-2018-15715

20

2018-11-30

2019-10-09

7.5

None

Remote

Low

Not required

Partial

Partial

Partial

Zoom clients on Windows (before version 4.1.34814.1119), Mac OS (before version 4.1.34801.1116), and Linux (2.4.129780.0915 and below) are vulnerable to unauthorized message processing. A remote unauthenticated attacker can spoof UDP messages from a meeting attendee or Zoom server in order to invoke functionality in the target client. This allows the attacker to remove attendees from meetings, spoof messages from users, or hijack shared screens.

4

CVE-2014-5811

310

+Info

2014-09-09

2014-09-20

5.4

None

Local Network

Medium

Not required

Partial

Partial

Partial

The ZOOM Cloud Meetings (aka us.zoom.videomeetings) application @7F060008 for Android does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.

It is pretty amazing since they have a package aimed at specifically at healthcare and advertise HIPAA security compliance. I tried to convince my office that Zoom wasn't the best choice, but there is too much momentum in the legal field toward zoom. 

Edited April 3, 2020 by Dahobbs

[Liquor and Poker 3659]

11 minutes ago, bolverk said:

The NYTimes has a treasure-trove of data on countries, the US, individual states, and all the counties with tables and heat maps. Especially useful are the county tables with a little bar next to them color-coded by the growth rate where you can see whether things are heating up or cooling off. I think the paywall has been lifted from all of this. 

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-cases.html

 

 

 

Is there a map anywhere of total # of tests or per capita # tests?  Would be interesting to see if there's a correlation.

[dcar00 14947]

2 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I think if it was some silver bullet, it would’ve already shown it. We’re not the first country using it. 

 

2 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

I think if it was some silver bullet, it would’ve already shown it. We’re not the first country using it. 

no magic bullet for sure but it might keep someone in the right age/complication zone from getting to ventilator situation.  I think people are so for it because it seems to not have bad side effects so its a might as well try it.

[BBQ2Bayou 807]

28 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Due to the Texas spring breakers in Cabo and the law and shit, does anyone know if Cabo Bobs on Anderson Ln is open?

They're having a foam party tonight and tomorrow. 

[Liquor and Poker 3659]

18 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Also PSA, Zoom has a shitload of security vulnerabilities and you shouldn't use an email associated with an organization or domain group when registering due to contact and photo sharing functionality that they built in before it went big. Some of their bugs are real fuckin bad, especially considering that judicial proceedings and privileged/confidential communications are flowing across it

1

CVE-2019-13567

20

Exec Code

2019-07-12

2019-08-30

6.8

None

Remote

Medium

Not required

Partial

Partial

Partial

The Zoom Client before 4.4.53932.0709 on macOS allows remote code execution, a different vulnerability than CVE-2019-13450. If the ZoomOpener daemon (aka the hidden web server) is running, but the Zoom Client is not installed or can't be opened, an attacker can remotely execute code with a maliciously crafted launch URL. NOTE: ZoomOpener is removed by the Apple Malware Removal Tool (MRT) if this tool is enabled and has the 2019-07-10 MRTConfigData.

2

CVE-2019-13450

284

2019-07-09

2019-07-16

4.3

None

Remote

Medium

Not required

Partial

None

None

In the Zoom Client through 4.4.4 and RingCentral 7.0.136380.0312 on macOS, remote attackers can force a user to join a video call with the video camera active. This occurs because any web site can interact with the Zoom web server on localhost port 19421 or 19424. NOTE: a machine remains vulnerable if the Zoom Client was installed in the past and then uninstalled. Blocking exploitation requires additional steps, such as the ZDisableVideo preference and/or killing the web server, deleting the ~/.zoomus directory, and creating a ~/.zoomus plain file.

3

CVE-2018-15715

20

2018-11-30

2019-10-09

7.5

None

Remote

Low

Not required

Partial

Partial

Partial

Zoom clients on Windows (before version 4.1.34814.1119), Mac OS (before version 4.1.34801.1116), and Linux (2.4.129780.0915 and below) are vulnerable to unauthorized message processing. A remote unauthenticated attacker can spoof UDP messages from a meeting attendee or Zoom server in order to invoke functionality in the target client. This allows the attacker to remove attendees from meetings, spoof messages from users, or hijack shared screens.

4

CVE-2014-5811

310

+Info

2014-09-09

2014-09-20

5.4

None

Local Network

Medium

Not required

Partial

Partial

Partial

The ZOOM Cloud Meetings (aka us.zoom.videomeetings) application @7F060008 for Android does not verify X.509 certificates from SSL servers, which allows man-in-the-middle attackers to spoof servers and obtain sensitive information via a crafted certificate.

I am far from an IT expert, but that's 5 vulnerabilities.  I can't tell if they're patched or resolved, either.  Is 5, in IT speak, a "shitload?"

[MonkeyDoughnut 10803]

I know the overall coverage on this is to limit exposure and flatter curve, etc. and areas like NYC need dramatic drops quick, but other areas in the country, are the spread rates too low?  Any data/studies that show what a target spread rate would be ideal?

My concern is were shutting some areas off too quick and too much while others obviously not enough.  There is a definite balance between dragging this out too long vs not long enough.

[dcar00 14947]

Fauci saying he can't believe wet markets are still open based on decades of evidence.  It would be nice if the UN and WHO would actually step in a do something about these things.  This might be one thing they can actually help the world with.

[bolverk 30320]

5 minutes ago, Liquor and Poker said:

Is there a map anywhere of total # of tests or per capita # tests?  Would be interesting to see if there's a correlation.

Are you talking about the number of available tests/test kits? No, none that I'm aware of. And, yeah, that'd be really interesting to see.

[NoName 17147]

 

3 minutes ago, Liquor and Poker said:

I am far from an IT expert, but that's 5 vulnerabilities.  I can't tell if they're patched or resolved, either.  Is 5, in IT speak, a "shitload?"

where are these from? original source?

[jimmyjazz 47133]

1 hour ago, NorthLoop said:

Nobody here knows because everyone on Surly makes more than that. 

Shit, my kids make more than that.

[stone oak 639]

Just now, dcar00 said:

It would be nice if the UN and WHO would actually step in a do something about these things.  

[Liquor and Poker 3659]

1 minute ago, bolverk said:

Are you talking about the number of available tests/test kits? No, none that I'm aware of. And, yeah, that'd be really interesting to see.

Maybe.  That's also an interesting data point. 

But what I meant is some way to correlate the % positive of all tests by state.  So, say LA has X confirmed cases.  How many tests has it done?  What's the positive %?  If it's twice as many tests done as Texas and roughly twice as many positives, but the same % percent, that's just an interesting datapoint to ponder.

[Liquor and Poker 3659]

3 minutes ago, NoName said:

 

where are these from? original source?

There's a link in Captainant's post (the word "shitload.")

[dcar00 14947]

1 minute ago, MonkeyDoughnut said:

I know the overall coverage on this is to limit exposure and flatter curve, etc. and areas like NYC need dramatic drops quick, but other areas in the country, are the spread rates too low?  Any data/studies that show what a target spread rate would be ideal?

My concern is were shutting some areas off too quick and too much while others obviously not enough.  There is a definite balance between dragging this out too long vs not long enough.

unfortunately this thing hits the old hard and they are the most vulnerable. We have a natural herd situation(hopefully slower and smoother than others)because of our free society.  to answer your question IMO I don't think you can have too slow a spread rate and I believe 10M+ have had this or have this already.

[NoName 17147]

Just now, Liquor and Poker said:

There's a link in Captainant's post (the word "shitload.")

thanks - missed it!

[G650 14437]

1 hour ago, Hate said:

So I guess we are all going to wear masks in public going forward which is just fine with me. Where are we supposed to get the masks?

Amazon. There's loads of surgical masks available as of yesterday when I looked

[LABEVO 928]

 

[dcar00 14947]

5 minutes ago, NoName said:

 

where are these from? original source?

not sure.  try clicking the link

[NoName 17147]

1 minute ago, dcar00 said:

not sure.  try clicking the link

yeah, i missed it - https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-2159/Zoom.html

thanks!

[dcar00 14947]

Just now, NoName said:

yeah, i missed it - https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-2159/Zoom.html

thanks!

actually I was kind of joking(about clicking unknown links) but hey all good!

[jimmyjazz 47133]

1 hour ago, Murfdogg21 said:

Well fuck me. Closed down daycare still charging tuition and have to hire a babysitter during the day now through June. 

I wouldn't pay that tuition.  That's ridiculous.  My wife teaches at a church-based preschool and the most they've done is implore parents to continue to pay tuition "if they can".  Right now, base paychecks (which don't include significant bumps for things like late stay and penalties for late child pickup) are flowing, but I don't think that's gonna last for even another pay cycle.

Extra bonus:  since it's a 501c3, employees don't qualify for unemployment.

[bolverk 30320]

9 minutes ago, Liquor and Poker said:

Maybe.  That's also an interesting data point. 

But what I meant is some way to correlate the % positive of all tests by state.  So, say LA has X confirmed cases.  How many tests has it done?  What's the positive %?  If it's twice as many tests done as Texas and roughly twice as many positives, but the same % percent, that's just an interesting datapoint to ponder.

Can't think of it off-hand. I've seen someone previously post the ratio of tests to confirmed cases by geography elsewhere that I think is better than this, but the Rice nerds have put together this map. On the right, in yellow, it says 50,679 tests have been administered in Texas.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

Edit: Sorry. Wrong link. Too many tabs open. Here's the Rice one:

https://www.coronavirusintexas.org/

Edited April 3, 2020 by bolverk

[Hate 20247]

Amazon. There's loads of surgical masks available as of yesterday when I looked

Thanks. I just ordered some as well as some gloves. Saturday night sexy time is about to get a little more fun.

['stache 22131]

1 hour ago, Texas Jeff said:

You can read the law here:  https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/6819239/FINAL-FINAL-CARES-ACT.pdf

See Sec 2201 starting on page 144.  The money is a tax credit for tax year 2020, but they are giving checks to taxpayers now.  It looks to me like the $500 per kid is lumped in with the $1200 (or $2400 for married folks) to figure the amount of your credit.  It starts to phase out at $75,000 AGI for an individual, $112,500 for a head of household, and $150,000 for a joint return.

I think they are going to guess the amount of your credit due based on a previous year's tax return when they send you a check, but ultimately you will see some math on your 2020 taxes to figure out what the actual credit should have been.

I'm in the middle of the phase out range based on my 2018 income, but my 2020 income will likely be significantly less because a good deal of my pay comes at year end and the money that is normally there likely won't be this year. So if I get half the money up front and it gets readjusted for year 2020 where I might qualify for the full amount, it sounds like I can get the rest as an additional credit on my 2020 taxes. Or I may be wrong, math and accounting are not my strengths.

[closetojumping 65387]

9 minutes ago, Liquor and Poker said:

Maybe.  That's also an interesting data point. 

But what I meant is some way to correlate the % positive of all tests by state.  So, say LA has X confirmed cases.  How many tests has it done?  What's the positive %?  If it's twice as many tests done as Texas and roughly twice as many positives, but the same % percent, that's just an interesting datapoint to ponder.

I've been using this to come up with percentages and day-over-day changes on my own. It's solid.

https://covidtracking.com/data/

[Dahobbs 18305]

19 minutes ago, Liquor and Poker said:

I am far from an IT expert, but that's 5 vulnerabilities.  I can't tell if they're patched or resolved, either.  Is 5, in IT speak, a "shitload?"

Those are pretty severe vulnerabilities, so yes, that is a shitload for this sort of product. 

[Liquor and Poker 3659]

5 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Can't think of it off-hand. I've seen someone previously post the ratio of tests to confirmed cases by geography elsewhere that I think is better than this, but the Rice nerds have put together this map. On the right, in yellow, it says 50,679 tests have been administered in Texas.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

Edit: Sorry. Wrong link. Too many tabs open. Here's the Rice one:

https://www.coronavirusintexas.org/

Thanks. So according to that, Texas is running at roughly 9.2% positive.  So, let's say NY is running at 6%.  Does that mean more widespread testing?  Or does that mean a different selection process for the test?  Or does it mean something in terms of spread here vs. there?  No idea, but it's interesting.

[MNLonghornFUKM 8977]

Thanks. I just ordered some as well as some gloves. Saturday night sexy time is about to get a little more fun.

I ordered these for my wife and I. Should be here today

[Captainant 28519]

16 minutes ago, Liquor and Poker said:

I am far from an IT expert, but that's 5 vulnerabilities.  I can't tell if they're patched or resolved, either.  Is 5, in IT speak, a "shitload?"

Fair that 5 vulns isn't that much, but they've got several extremely severe remote code execution bugs across all platforms, along with man in the middle vulnerabilities. Which is concerning since the existence of those vulns runs counter to HIPPA and PCI requirements, which they're claiming to meet. 

The bugs have technically been patched, but it's incumbent on the users to upgrade their client version to get the fix, and zoom is still servicing old client versions, so it's not really resolved yet. 

And there's yet more vulns coming out, like the aforementioned contact and photo sharing with emails that share an org or domain. But neither here nor there. If you use zoom, I'd advise closing and quitting the program when you aren't using it. Some of the Mac vulns from last year let remote users turn on mics and cameras without local user input. 

[closetojumping 65387]

1 hour ago, closetojumping said:

Looking at the latest infection rates by state today (it's through yesterday's released data by each state), a few things are interesting and/or scary.

Michigan's positive rate of those tested continues to climb. They're at 48% of all people tested are positive. As of yesterday's data, they were at 44%. They're screaming upward. 

New Jersey isn't great, but less aggressive growth, going from 42% yesterday to almost 43.3% today. 

New York is better. They were around 38.5% yesterday and they're at 38.6% today. 

Places like Texas are creeping up, but not rocketing and still below 10%. Texas was at 7.5% 8 days ago. They're at 9.2% today. 

Washington's percentage continues to go down, which is great. 

I'll admit, I can't make an argument that any of this is a great indicator, simply because availability of testing isn't uniform and there's absolutely a bias towards self-selection. That said,  I'd rather see states tracking lower and lower in the ratio, rather than higher and higher. NY stabilizing a bit and Washington heading down are both signs that there is some sort of curve reflecting mitigation impact playing into these numbers too. 

I guess we'll know more if Michigan truly lights itself on fire here, because it's not a small sample. They're at 48% with almost 23,000 tests being run. If they become a huge story on the death toll end, I won't be shocked. They've kind of been "holding steady" this week with 70-80-ish deaths accounted for each day. My guess is that will start to shift upward significantly.

 

7 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

I've been using this to come up with percentages and day-over-day changes on my own. It's solid.

https://covidtracking.com/data/

 

2 minutes ago, Liquor and Poker said:

Thanks. So according to that, Texas is running at roughly 9.2% positive.  So, let's say NY is running at 6%.  Does that mean more widespread testing?  Or does that mean a different selection process for the test?  Or does it mean something in terms of spread here vs. there?  No idea, but it's interesting.

If you've got me on ignore, I guess neither of the posts I quoted will help you, but in case you don't and this thread just moves quickly, here are additional thoughts and potential answers to your questions.

[BillyGoatHill 4420]

13 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Can't think of it off-hand. I've seen someone previously post the ratio of tests to confirmed cases by geography elsewhere that I think is better than this, but the Rice nerds have put together this map. On the right, in yellow, it says 50,679 tests have been administered in Texas.

https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html

Edit: Sorry. Wrong link. Too many tabs open. Here's the Rice one:

https://www.coronavirusintexas.org/

Thanks for correcting.....I was thinking, WTF? Rice dudes have converged with Johns Hopkins?

[Liquor and Poker 3659]

5 minutes ago, closetojumping said:

I've been using this to come up with percentages and day-over-day changes on my own. It's solid.

https://covidtracking.com/data/

YES!  Thanks! This is the one I remember.  Lots of weirdness in that data.  For example, LA is at roughly 18% positive.  Okie at almost 40% positive.  CA is at 2/3 "pending."  WA is roughly the same percentage as Texas.  So different.

To me, this kind of messes up any nationwide data on # of cases or "reductions in R0" that flow from number of cases.  But I fucking hated statistics class in college.

[Js1 87175]

 

[Liquor and Poker 3659]

1 hour ago, closetojumping said:

Looking at the latest infection rates by state today (it's through yesterday's released data by each state), a few things are interesting and/or scary.

Michigan's positive rate of those tested continues to climb. They're at 48% of all people tested are positive. As of yesterday's data, they were at 44%. They're screaming upward. 

New Jersey isn't great, but less aggressive growth, going from 42% yesterday to almost 43.3% today. 

New York is better. They were around 38.5% yesterday and they're at 38.6% today. 

Places like Texas are creeping up, but not rocketing and still below 10%. Texas was at 7.5% 8 days ago. They're at 9.2% today. 

Washington's percentage continues to go down, which is great. 

I'll admit, I can't make an argument that any of this is a great indicator, simply because availability of testing isn't uniform and there's absolutely a bias towards self-selection. That said,  I'd rather see states tracking lower and lower in the ratio, rather than higher and higher. NY stabilizing a bit and Washington heading down are both signs that there is some sort of curve reflecting mitigation impact playing into these numbers too. 

I guess we'll know more if Michigan truly lights itself on fire here, because it's not a small sample. They're at 48% with almost 23,000 tests being run. If they become a huge story on the death toll end, I won't be shocked. They've kind of been "holding steady" this week with 70-80-ish deaths accounted for each day. My guess is that will start to shift upward significantly.

Somehow I missed this.  This is exactly where I am.

[Walden Ponderer 12639]

1 hour ago, Hate said:

So I guess we are all going to wear masks in public going forward which is just fine with me. Where are we supposed to get the masks?

I'm re-using some old painters masks; not a great solution, but it's all I've got, until there's more on the shelves. Do what I can (spray with alcohol, dry in the sun for UV), but i'm no biomedical engineer. This issue, like so many other things in this crisis, really comes down to applying common sense and hoping for the best.

[Hate 20247]

Fair that 5 vulns isn't that much, but they've got several extremely severe remote code execution bugs across all platforms, along with man in the middle vulnerabilities. Which is concerning since the existence of those vulns runs counter to HIPPA and PCI requirements, which they're claiming to meet. 
The bugs have technically been patched, but it's incumbent on the users to upgrade their client version to get the fix, and zoom is still servicing old client versions, so it's not really resolved yet. 
And there's yet more vulns coming out, like the aforementioned contact and photo sharing with emails that share an org or domain. But neither here nor there. If you use zoom, I'd advise closing and quitting the program when you aren't using it. Some of the Mac vulns from last year let remote users turn on mics and cameras without local user input. 

There is also a “user” element to these vulnerabilities just as there are with email vulnerabilities. There are a lot of people logging on now that have no prior experience to working this way and are unable to recognize legitimate links from “phishing” type links. Zoom needs to fix their issues as quickly as possible, but users also need to educated as to what to look for when their meeting has been compromised. I would also assume a large majority of these “security issues” were a result of people not setting up passwords for their meetings which is something nobody would ever recommend. I don’t know that for a fact, but it would not surprise me at all.

[JesusSweatDuck 18089]

35 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

It is pretty amazing since they have a package aimed at specifically at healthcare and advertise HIPAA security compliance. I tried to convince my office that Zoom wasn't the best choice, but there is too momentum in the legal field toward zoom. 

HIPAA compliance doesn't actually require much security.  It's terrifying TBH