No, you just made a large number of flaws in your initial analysis, and it made people despair of going to the effort to point out where you went wrong.
E.g. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22648730
You're producing a future estimate, assuming that all properties of your dataset are consistent (they aren't) and will continue to hold (they won't).
As a few examples: (1) varying ratio of confirmed cases to actual total, (2) % increase in testing per day, day-over-day, (3) varying time offset according to disease progression and symptoms presentation (aka testing).
You seem to be of the opinion that any information is better than no information. In scenarios like this, I'm of the counter opinion that bad information is actively harmful and inferior to no information.
Seeing as you don't have access to my analysis, you can't say that.
> You're producing a future estimate, assuming that all properties of your dataset are consistent (they aren't) and will continue to hold (they won't).
This is just vague stuff to put me down. I worked by confirmed cases in publicly available data.
> varying ratio of confirmed cases to actual total
I'm not sure what this mean but I went by the total confirmed cases, day by day. As for your 'increased testing', I'm fully aware the US is finally getting going.
> varying time offset according to disease progression and symptoms presentation (aka testing).
Why would the progress at different rates at different times in different individuals make any difference? I'm going by confirmed cases anyways so unless you know of a new strain with different characteristics that's starting to distort the figures (and there are possibly 2) then it makes no difference.
No, save your slapdowns for the people who push garlic as treatment. You are objecting to me for psychological reasons, not logical ones. You can go to the wiki page and see the growth day by day but you don't want to because it's bad news and you don't like that. Well, get used to it. Your life is going to change, nothing will stop that and the sooner you face it the safer you and your country will be. Hard times ahead. Good luck.
Like other people have said through this thread, it's rather simple: you don't know what you are doing, and at this time bad information is worse than no information, and it will hurt people. And reiterating my remarks on my first post: stop being so arrogant, this is really the only word to describe your attitude as far as I'm concerned.
And "I am a bloody genius [...] by plotting a bunch of points in a log scale" - I actually used the words 'admittedly trite' about what I did.
Whatever. This gets us nowhere. Your profile says you have a background in physics and logic/automated reasoning. I'm just a general purpose back-end dev. We're facing something that may kill more people than WW2, let's concentrate on that. Can we work together to do something useful? Thoughts?
> and fitting ke^x to data doesn't make us informed
Well, yours is an interesting post but let me ask if curve fitting doesn't make us more informed then what does? There's an update to the data for the US in the past few hours and it doesn't improve things.
I very carefully stated out my limitations, and then pointed them out again when someone critiqued my approach (see edit on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22645793). I have done my best to accept my limitations, but still I get people like you hammering me.
So the question is why are we even posting anything on HN? Bottom line is what is HN for - non-factual debate, or factual debate?
I strongly get the impression that much criticism isn't based on my admittedly trite analysis but because a lot of people just don't know how to handle really bad news and are trying to blank a nasty reality. Doubly so when I'm accused of of "hold on! I'll save the day!" which is purely your invention.