Hantavirus incompetence

We're all sick of pandemics. That's a terrible reason to mishandle outbreaks

Dutch medical staff escort a patient in a hazmat suit from a medical aircraft that allegedly carried passengers from the cruise ship infected by hantavirus. (Photo by Lina Selg/AFP via Getty Images)

“We’re taking The Argument to San Francisco! On May 13, Jerusalem Demsas and I are debating a question that feels unavoidable right now: Is AI actually changing how science gets done, or are we in the middle of a very expensive illusion? She’s bullish; I’m skeptical.

And you won’t just be watching. You’ll get to join in on the argument, too.

Join us May 13 at The Chapel from 7 to 10 p.m. Come argue with us! RSVP here.

---

In 2016, a lot of pundits said that Hillary Clinton had a 99% chance of winning the election. Nate Silver said she had a 71% chance. They were both wrong, but I think it’s fair to say that Silver was much less wrong — the Election Day result was much less surprising from his standpoint than theirs.

If you get the wrong answer, very few people care whether you assigned the right probability or whether your overall track record is good. If you say that a pandemic has only a 5% chance of being a big deal, and then it is a big deal, you were wrong. If you write something saying that 19 other pandemics have a 5% chance of being a big deal, and then none of them are a big deal, you were wrong about those ones too — you wasted everyone’s time over nothing!

We are collectively horrendous at reasoning about not just extremely implausible things but mildly implausible things, and if something is moderately unlikely but would be a huge deal if it did happen, you can predict just from that that we’re probably horrendously mishandling it.

This brings me to the hantavirus outbreak attracting international attention: While it’s unlikely to achieve significant further spread, health officials need to quarantine every person on that boat.