There are lots of kids that don't attend public schools (private schools, religious schools, home schooled) that aren't subject to those requirements. Every state permits exceptions for medical reasons. Nearly all states permit exceptions for religious reasons. Just about every religion is OK with vaccines, because just about every religion values protecting life, and don't have hangups about how vaccines accomplish that.

But a whole lot of states - Texas included - permit exceptions for "philosophical reasons", which is the mile-wide loophole for "I don't wanna." (Unspoken: "And meanwhile I'll rely on herd immunity from everyone else.")

The current measles outbreaks in the US, if you had bothered to investigate, are concentrated in Mennonite communities in Texas, Utah, and New Mexico. Mennonites on the whole do not have theological objections to vaccines; but certain sects differ. By and large, it appears the affected groups mostly fall in the "I don't wanna" category, because that's the community norm, rather than "God told me not to!"

The unvaccinated are the fuel that allows the fire to spread. If vaccination rates in those communities were >95%, per recommendations, the outbreak would have been extinguished almost immediately. If the outbreak were a bunch of diseased immigrants (legal or not) coming around, you would expect the Administration and MAGA base would be highlighting that all day and night. They haven't been making that link, because they can't.

Yes, you did, because what you are saying is bullshit.

And that situation is recognized. Having one case, or a small collection of cases, that result from travel is accepted and doesn't jeopardize a country's status. The fact that it keeps popping up and spreading due to poor vaccination rates, inadequate response, rampant misinformation, and other bullshit is the reason the US' eradication status is being threatened. Tossing a lit match onto the floor doesn't cause a house to burn down - unless you've left a pile of oily rags lying around.

Trump and RFK Jr are merely the current avatars for the anti-science bullshit that's been building for decades. It isn't solely a US problem, either, you can find the same proudly-contrarian-ignorant attitudes in lots of places. The US just happens to have a really bad case of it.

But as to points #2 and 3: a competent administration would follow the successful public health playbook for dealing with any outbreak. you bring in resources, you trace contacts, you quarantine or vaccinate everyone around confirmed cases. You speak the clearest message about the best available information, using every communications channel you can find.

If Trump and RFK Jr had the knowledge and inclination - or at least the humility to get the hell out of the way - the outbreaks in the US would have been contained months ago. Instead, we've got RFK Jr giving dangerous advice about vitamin A while children are hospitalized and die.

So, yes, I fully lay this mess at their feet: it's their responsibility to take it seriously and address it forcefully. Instead, they barely acknowledge there's a problem, don't seem to be doing anything constructive about it.

I think I saw someone swimming in some sewage en route from scraping a bear carcass off the road, let me go check.

1. I got asked once if I played world of warcraft since they say a guy with the name "thegarbz" playing. I said no. By the way I know exactly who that person is because he impersonated me as a joke. I found that flattering and funny, but it has no impact on my life beyond that.

Reminds me of my first email account ;) One of my professors said we all had to register for an email account (this was in the mid-90s) so we could submit our homework to him, so I registered his name at hotmail.com to mess with him ;)

I don't trust single points of failure.

Yeah, this. If I have to sign up to some site that I don't care at all if it gets hacked, I use a throwaway password. Oh noez, someone might compromise my WidgetGenerator.foo.bar account and generate some widgets in my name, heavens to betsy!

The U.S. government issues loans all the time - there are dozens of active programs, and they have a shaky track record. For instance: everyone loves to shit on the $500M loan to Solyndra, which promptly went belly-up. Around the same time, though, the US loaned $450M to Tesla, which they used to stand up with Fremont plant. Tesla paid that loan back nine years early, with interest and a pre-payment penalty (in part to avoid having the loan convert to stock). The CHIPS Act works almost entirely via subsidies and loan guarantees - $52B worth.

But that's chump change - let's not forget about TARP: $700B in loans, direct capital injections, and purchasing toxic assets that the US Gov't rolled out to combat the 2008 financial crisis. Some of that actually turned a profit for the US taxpayer, but on the whole the program lost about $30B. A cost, and a boatload of socialized risk, but we also avoided another Great Depression.

But nothing can compare to the Federal Housing Administration, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac: $150B in loan purchases, guarantees, and mortgage insurance every single year. On the plus side, we have a more accessible and robust housing market. (More than it would be otherwise, I mean - I will readily admit that it doesn't feel very accessible at the moment.) I ought my first home sooner and less expensively with their help, so thank you. But the FHA also invented redlining. And FM/FM are the very paragon of socialized risk and privatized profit.

In the middle of the press conference, Enrico Fermi's ghost apparates and says, with a disgusted look on his face: "Bah, I achieved criticality with a pile of graphite blocks under the bleachers at University of Chicago 83 years ago!"

His surname is one transposition away from "AI Mode".

Gosh, I remember the days when a Slashdot summary was actually, ya know, a summary; not a 675-word regurgitation of lengthy quotes, with no work done by the submitter or editor.

Maybe I should just feed the "summary" into an LLM and ask it what the hell they're talking about.

Yeah, because all even/all odd is (from basic statistics) rare, and happens to be rarer than the percentage of people who play all-even or all-odd, so you'd be more likely to split any winnings.

Modern models will take into account statistical biases in lotteries. For example, here's ChatGPT:

Pick good lottery numbers for the Virginia powerball lottery

Good question. First, a reality check: Powerball is pure chance — there’s no “good” numbers that are more likely to win. Every set of 5 white balls (1–69) + 1 Powerball (1–26) has exactly the same probability.
wwwuat.valottery.com
+1

That said, I can give you a few tips + a sample “random but balanced” pick, if you’d like to pick your own numbers rather than use Quick Pick.

Some tips when choosing your Powerball numbers

Spread your numbers
Try to pick a mix across the range (low, mid, high). According to lottery-strategy advice, not clustering all your numbers in one group is better.
samlotto.com

Avoid patterns
Many people pick birthdays, anniversaries, or sequential numbers. That’s fine—but if you win, you might have to share with more people because these are popular picks.
lotteryvalley.com

Use “due” or “hot” numbers carefully
Some sites (like lottery-analysis tools) track which numbers are “hot” (drawn recently) or “overdue” (haven’t appeared in a while). But remember: past draws don’t change future odds.
m.lottostrategies.com

Mix even and odd
According to some statistical analyses, it’s less likely to draw all odd or all even numbers.
samlotto.com

Play responsibly
Odds of winning the Powerball jackpot are extremely long: 1 in ~292 million.
lotterycritic.com

Sample “balanced” Powerball pick

Here’s a random-but-balanced combination you could use just for fun (or as a basis to tweak):

White balls: 8, 23, 41, 57, 65

Powerball: 12

If you like, I can generate 5 different “smart random” picks for the next Virginia Powerball draw (balanced by probability and number distribution). Do you want me to do that?

It's a damned shame '99942 Apothis' will miss us in a few years

It's not too late to fix that.

The thing is, it very much *won't* be random numbers. It's about as far from a random number generator as you can get.

In a really bad model, one would expect it to likely be "numbers it's seen the most in the context of a lottery". But in a good model, esp. a thinking model, one would expect it to think over which sorts of numbers are statistically over-chosen (birthdates, etc) and avoid them in giving its answers.

The funny thing is, think of how this woman will interact with ChatGPT from now on. ChatGPT could say "Abraham Lincoln was married to John Wilkes Booth", and she'd be thinking, "Okay, that sounds really, really wrong, but on the other hand, it picked the right lottery numbers, so..."