One-Third of U.S. Museums May Not Survive the Year, Survey Finds

Re:One-Third of U.S. Museums May Not Survive the Year, Surve... by makomk on Thursday July 23, 2020 @05:22AM (#23925583)

Which is in itself kind of a problem. What's the endgame here - what are all these lockdowns helping to push us towards? We can't just lock down forever, it's fundamentally unsustainable and the damage compounds over time, and it doesn't look like there's a way out that doesn't involve a large death toll. Nor is there much prospect of salvation from (say) vaccination or treatment any time soon.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:One-Third of U.S. Museums May Not Survive the Year, Surve... by codingdave on Thursday July 23, 2020 @08:23AM (#23926531)

> What's the endgame here

To slow the spread so that our medical facilities have the capacity to handle the sick, and we don't have to let people die due to lack of healthcare resources.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:One-Third of U.S. Museums May Not Survive the Year, Surve... by zaarn on Thursday July 23, 2020 @05:48AM (#23925686)

With a lockdown you slow down the infection. This has a few goals at the same time.

First, you lessen the load of the healthcare system. If a lot of people get sick at the same time, hospitals would be swamped and more people would die because care is impossible.

Second, you can bring the disease from an exponential growth to sub-exponential, potentially containing it mostly (this is what happened for example in Germany, where tracking individual infections is now possible again).

Third, you buy yourself time until a vaccine is available. Even if no vaccine is going to appear in the near future, as long as you slow it down long enough (1-2 years) from reaching saturation in the population, that's lives saved.

[ Parent | on HN ]