New Thinking On Covid Lockdowns: They’re Overly Blunt And Costly

[haidut]

It seems like MSM is starting to backtrack on the whole COVID-19 approach. Of course, the presentation is that the destruction of the worldwide economy was done for our benefit but the conclusion by WSJ is still that it was a massive mistake. Reading this WSJ piece feels like such a deja-vu considering these are the exact same issues that we discussed on the forum back in March/April (.e. doing targeted quarantines for vulnerable sub-populations, scrutinizing the benefit of social isolation for controlling the virus or achieving herd immunity, criticism of mask effectiveness, etc) when this fiasco was just starting and a number of vocal forum members kept hysterically insisting that such discussions were a conspiracy theory and the "benevolent" and "expert" authorities surely had taken into account the pros and cons of lockdowns. Well, as it happens so many times, it looks like a risk/benefit analysis was nothing more than wishful thinking and any dissenting voices were silenced at the time. Now the chickens have come home to roost and even MSM is starting to realize another mass lockdown would be a literal suicide...or civil war(s) on a worldwide scale.
To add insult to injury the article is calling such selective lockdowns and cost/benefit analyses a "new" thinking on handling the "pandemic" when in reality these concerns were being voiced from the very beginning and mostly ridiculed and/or (il)legally suppressed by the powers that be. It reminds me quite a bit about those studies on treating prostate cancer with testosterone/DHT, which the pharma industry kept calling "paradoxical" and "grounbreaking" despite brutally suppressing evidence/scientists in favor of those exact interventions for more than a century. It probably won't be long before we see articles in MSM titled "Paradoxical benefits from NOT wearing a mask during the pandemic"...
New Thinking on Covid Lockdowns: They’re Overly Blunt and Costly

"...In response to the novel and deadly coronavirus, many governments deployed draconian tactics never used in modern times: severe and broad restrictions on daily activity that helped send the world into its deepest peacetime slump since the Great Depression. The equivalent of 400 million jobs have been lost world-wide, 13 million in the U.S. alone. Global output is on track to fall 5% this year, far worse than during the financial crisis, according to the International Monetary Fund. Despite this steep price, few policy makers felt they had a choice, seeing the economic crisis as a side effect of the health crisis. They ordered nonessential businesses closed and told people to stay home, all without the extensive analysis of benefits and risks that usually precedes a new medical treatment. There wasn’t time to gather that sort of evidence: Faced with a poorly understood and rapidly spreading pathogen, they prioritized saving lives. Five months later, the evidence suggests lockdowns were an overly blunt and economically costly tool. They are politically difficult to keep in place for long enough to stamp out the virus. The evidence also points to alternative strategies that could slow the spread of the epidemic at much less cost. As cases flare up throughout the US, some experts are urging policymakers to pursue these more targeted restrictions and interventions rather than another crippling round of lockdowns."

@Drareg @tankasnowgod @boris @Giraffe @Regina

 

[Regina]

It seems like MSM is starting to backtrack on the whole COVID-19 approach. Of course, the presentation is that the destruction of the worldwide economy was done for our benefit but the conclusion by WSJ is still that it was a massive mistake. Reading this WSJ piece feels like such a deja-vu considering these are the exact same issues that we discussed on the forum back in March/April (.e. doing targeted quarantines for vulnerable sub-populations, scrutinizing the benefit of social isolation for controlling the virus or achieving herd immunity, criticism of mask effectiveness, etc) when this fiasco was just starting and a number of vocal forum members kept hysterically insisting that such discussions were a conspiracy theory and the "benevolent" and "expert" authorities surely had taken into account the pros and cons of lockdowns. Well, as it happens so many times, it looks like a risk/benefit analysis was nothing more than wishful thinking and any dissenting voices were silenced at the time. Now the chickens have come home to roost and even MSM is starting to realize another mass lockdown would be a literal suicide...or civil war(s) on a worldwide scale.
To add insult to injury the article is calling such selective lockdowns and cost/benefit analyses a "new" thinking on handling the "pandemic" when in reality these concerns were being voiced from the very beginning and mostly ridiculed and/or (il)legally suppressed by the powers that be. It reminds me quite a bit about those studies on treating prostate cancer with testosterone/DHT, which the pharma industry kept calling "paradoxical" and "grounbreaking" despite brutally suppressing evidence/scientists in favor of those exact interventions for more than a century. It probably won't be long before we see articles in MSM titled "Paradoxical benefits from NOT wearing a mask during the pandemic"...
New Thinking on Covid Lockdowns: They’re Overly Blunt and Costly

"...In response to the novel and deadly coronavirus, many governments deployed draconian tactics never used in modern times: severe and broad restrictions on daily activity that helped send the world into its deepest peacetime slump since the Great Depression. The equivalent of 400 million jobs have been lost world-wide, 13 million in the U.S. alone. Global output is on track to fall 5% this year, far worse than during the financial crisis, according to the International Monetary Fund. Despite this steep price, few policy makers felt they had a choice, seeing the economic crisis as a side effect of the health crisis. They ordered nonessential businesses closed and told people to stay home, all without the extensive analysis of benefits and risks that usually precedes a new medical treatment. There wasn’t time to gather that sort of evidence: Faced with a poorly understood and rapidly spreading pathogen, they prioritized saving lives. Five months later, the evidence suggests lockdowns were an overly blunt and economically costly tool. They are politically difficult to keep in place for long enough to stamp out the virus. The evidence also points to alternative strategies that could slow the spread of the epidemic at much less cost. As cases flare up throughout the US, some experts are urging policymakers to pursue these more targeted restrictions and interventions rather than another crippling round of lockdowns."

@Drareg @tankasnowgod @boris @Giraffe @Regina

Aye, well the damage is done. The controlled demolition has been both phantasmagoria and brutally real with its many parallel threads of destruction. There are no words.
Yet they want to absolve the annihilation of the middle class with, 'we should consider new thinking'. Cause of course, 'we are all in this together', hand-wringing and struggling for the "science."
I'll be half-heartedly watching the mosquito op in FL. Maybe hurricane brings a massive mosquito outbreak and sad stories of zika babies. And, oh thank God for Bill Gates who will finally bring an end to this awful crisis. Thank God he is so smart and benevolent. See how great population control is? And thank God we will have more surveillance with all the gun-toting looters and immigrants bringing terrifying diseases.

 

[JudiBlueHen]

So 5 months later TPTB are beginning to see knock-on effects that they don't like. Because they believed their simulation exercise of Oct 2019 (they are all-knowing, ahem), and now it turns out that the slow expected "return to normal, with vaccine and surveillance" isn't exactly happening as anticipated.

Perhaps they underestimated the financial costs, expecting 1 or 2 giant bailouts, not an on-going drip of trillions of $$. Perhaps they thought everyone, after being traumatized 24/7, would just gladly and with great relief go back to work and school. Perhaps they did not anticipate that so many families will opt for homeschooling instead of public indoctrination/education. Perhaps they didn't realize that so many schools and colleges will become bankrupt and that public education requires a large number of students in order to get those federal $$. Perhaps they didn't think about the discontinuation of elective surgeries and procedures ($$ for doctors, surgery centers, staff, MOBs, meds...) and how many of them will never be performed, in spite of telling people it is OK now to do so (but you can't bring your spouse to talk to docs and advocate for you...). Perhaps they didn't think about who would take care of the empty stores and offices that will just naturally decay without regular use.

Perhaps they just forgot about entropy, or more likely, never understood it in the first place.

 

[Regina]

So 5 months later TPTB are beginning to see knock-on effects that they don't like. Because they believed their simulation exercise of Oct 2019 (they are all-knowing, ahem), and now it turns out that the slow expected "return to normal, with vaccine and surveillance" isn't exactly happening as anticipated.

Perhaps they underestimated the financial costs, expecting 1 or 2 giant bailouts, not an on-going drip of trillions of $$. Perhaps they thought everyone, after being traumatized 24/7, would just gladly and with great relief go back to work and school. Perhaps they did not anticipate that so many families will opt for homeschooling instead of public indoctrination/education. Perhaps they didn't realize that so many schools and colleges will become bankrupt and that public education requires a large number of students in order to get those federal $$. Perhaps they didn't think about the discontinuation of elective surgeries and procedures ($$ for doctors, surgery centers, staff, MOBs, meds...) and how many of them will never be performed, in spite of telling people it is OK now to do so (but you can't bring your spouse to talk to docs and advocate for you...). Perhaps they didn't think about who would take care of the empty stores and offices that will just naturally decay without regular use.

Perhaps they just forgot about entropy, or more likely, never understood it in the first place.

I think they planned for all of those things.

 

[Drareg]

It seems like MSM is starting to backtrack on the whole COVID-19 approach. Of course, the presentation is that the destruction of the worldwide economy was done for our benefit but the conclusion by WSJ is still that it was a massive mistake. Reading this WSJ piece feels like such a deja-vu considering these are the exact same issues that we discussed on the forum back in March/April (.e. doing targeted quarantines for vulnerable sub-populations, scrutinizing the benefit of social isolation for controlling the virus or achieving herd immunity, criticism of mask effectiveness, etc) when this fiasco was just starting and a number of vocal forum members kept hysterically insisting that such discussions were a conspiracy theory and the "benevolent" and "expert" authorities surely had taken into account the pros and cons of lockdowns. Well, as it happens so many times, it looks like a risk/benefit analysis was nothing more than wishful thinking and any dissenting voices were silenced at the time. Now the chickens have come home to roost and even MSM is starting to realize another mass lockdown would be a literal suicide...or civil war(s) on a worldwide scale.
To add insult to injury the article is calling such selective lockdowns and cost/benefit analyses a "new" thinking on handling the "pandemic" when in reality these concerns were being voiced from the very beginning and mostly ridiculed and/or (il)legally suppressed by the powers that be. It reminds me quite a bit about those studies on treating prostate cancer with testosterone/DHT, which the pharma industry kept calling "paradoxical" and "grounbreaking" despite brutally suppressing evidence/scientists in favor of those exact interventions for more than a century. It probably won't be long before we see articles in MSM titled "Paradoxical benefits from NOT wearing a mask during the pandemic"...
New Thinking on Covid Lockdowns: They’re Overly Blunt and Costly

"...In response to the novel and deadly coronavirus, many governments deployed draconian tactics never used in modern times: severe and broad restrictions on daily activity that helped send the world into its deepest peacetime slump since the Great Depression. The equivalent of 400 million jobs have been lost world-wide, 13 million in the U.S. alone. Global output is on track to fall 5% this year, far worse than during the financial crisis, according to the International Monetary Fund. Despite this steep price, few policy makers felt they had a choice, seeing the economic crisis as a side effect of the health crisis. They ordered nonessential businesses closed and told people to stay home, all without the extensive analysis of benefits and risks that usually precedes a new medical treatment. There wasn’t time to gather that sort of evidence: Faced with a poorly understood and rapidly spreading pathogen, they prioritized saving lives. Five months later, the evidence suggests lockdowns were an overly blunt and economically costly tool. They are politically difficult to keep in place for long enough to stamp out the virus. The evidence also points to alternative strategies that could slow the spread of the epidemic at much less cost. As cases flare up throughout the US, some experts are urging policymakers to pursue these more targeted restrictions and interventions rather than another crippling round of lockdowns."

@Drareg @tankasnowgod @boris @Giraffe @Regina

And yet in Australia and New Zealand.............

Let’s see how the German protests go this weekend , they have been told by the authorities the protests are banned but it’s still going ahead.

Everyone has tried to hijack the crisis to push through delusional ideologies and exposed themselves. The world/global type organizations like WHO and WEC have no credibility, they run relentless propaganda shilling for their ideologies, the more the public become aware the more we reject them, what really must hurt them is the fact it’s not all rednecks and Qanon types refuting their delusions, a lot of bright people ears have perked up because of this.

This is why I promote and approve every conspiracy theory I hear, even though I know some are clearly delusional, as long as folk are questioning the "higher social class" I encourage it and add to it where I can, it works, information and meaning.

 

[Drareg]

So 5 months later TPTB are beginning to see knock-on effects that they don't like. Because they believed their simulation exercise of Oct 2019 (they are all-knowing, ahem), and now it turns out that the slow expected "return to normal, with vaccine and surveillance" isn't exactly happening as anticipated.

Perhaps they underestimated the financial costs, expecting 1 or 2 giant bailouts, not an on-going drip of trillions of $$. Perhaps they thought everyone, after being traumatized 24/7, would just gladly and with great relief go back to work and school. Perhaps they did not anticipate that so many families will opt for homeschooling instead of public indoctrination/education. Perhaps they didn't realize that so many schools and colleges will become bankrupt and that public education requires a large number of students in order to get those federal $$. Perhaps they didn't think about the discontinuation of elective surgeries and procedures ($$ for doctors, surgery centers, staff, MOBs, meds...) and how many of them will never be performed, in spite of telling people it is OK now to do so (but you can't bring your spouse to talk to docs and advocate for you...). Perhaps they didn't think about who would take care of the empty stores and offices that will just naturally decay without regular use.

Perhaps they just forgot about entropy, or more likely, never understood it in the first place.

Bingo, you hit the nail on the head, entropy, of course their is negentropy also, why don’t we eat crystals Schrodinger pondered, Mae Wan Ho answered it much better.

The bottom line is they don’t understand cell physiology, throughout all this hysteria we have had to argue within the paradigm of mainstream medicine, that’s the real tragedy, even within their own medical paradigm it’s such an obvious overreaction to enact legislated lockdowns and mask wearing ,imprisoning citizens for violating this.
They were supposed to promote vaccine awareness along with a more open tracked world as positives for humanity, they have done the opposite, people are more vigilant and genuinely concerned about the knee jerk response of governments toward authoritarianism.

Bill Epstein Gates is still somewhat of a genetic determinist, none of these clowns every ask what runs the DNA, what does DNA plug into, it’s energetic source, the dynamo, this is possibly why they believe millions would die from covid19.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Let’s see how the German protests go this weekend , they have been told by the authorities the protests are banned but it’s still going ahead.

The idea of getting permission to protest from the entity that you intend to protest strikes me as odd. Or at the very least..... a conflict of interest.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Perhaps they didn't realize that so many schools and colleges will become bankrupt and that public education requires a large number of students in order to get those federal $$. Perhaps they didn't think about the discontinuation of elective surgeries and procedures ($$ for doctors, surgery centers, staff, MOBs, meds...) and how many of them will never be performed, in spite of telling people it is OK now to do so (but you can't bring your spouse to talk to docs and advocate for you...)

I'm thinking that the destruction of most schools (public ones, at least) and 99% of colleges and universities will absolutely be a wonderful thing. Beyond good, beyond great. Though there will obviously be some inconvenience for the next year or so.

The destruction of the medical system...... a little more torn. I still think there were some good doctors and treatments there, at least those requiring acute/emergency attention. But the medical system is the most corrupt, maybe the most murderous of all of them.

I don't think I would go to a doctor or hospital at this point if I were hemorrhaging. And I think my life expectancy would be longer if I didn't go.

 

[JudiBlueHen]

@Drareg thanks! I just looked up Mae Wan Ho and wow - how the traditional geneticists despise her. I see she has published a number of books - can you recommend one?

One of the tragedies of the lockdowns is the imprinting on the minds of countless people that many businesses are "non-essential". There is of course no body of law that establishes such an insulting and belittling concept. No wonder so many suffer unimaginable stress.

 

[JudiBlueHen]

I'm thinking that the destruction of most schools (public ones, at least) and 99% of colleges and universities will absolutely be a wonderful thing. Beyond good, beyond great. Though there will obviously be some inconvenience for the next year or so.

The destruction of the medical system...... a little more torn. I still think there were some good doctors and treatments there, at least those requiring acute/emergency attention. But the medical system is the most corrupt, maybe the most murderous of all of them.

I don't think I would go to a doctor or hospital at this point if I were hemorrhaging. And I think my life expectancy would be longer if I didn't go.

Agree with you on the schools - that's why I think it might be a bit of an unintended consequence. Also agree on acute care being amazing even if not always optimal.

 

[tankasnowgod]

It seems like MSM is starting to backtrack on the whole COVID-19 approach. Of course, the presentation is that the destruction of the worldwide economy was done for our benefit but the conclusion by WSJ is still that it was a massive mistake. Reading this WSJ piece feels like such a deja-vu considering these are the exact same issues that we discussed on the forum back in March/April (.e. doing targeted quarantines for vulnerable sub-populations, scrutinizing the benefit of social isolation for controlling the virus or achieving herd immunity, criticism of mask effectiveness, etc) when this fiasco was just starting and a number of vocal forum members kept hysterically insisting that such discussions were a conspiracy theory and the "benevolent" and "expert" authorities surely had taken into account the pros and cons of lockdowns. Well, as it happens so many times, it looks like a risk/benefit analysis was nothing more than wishful thinking and any dissenting voices were silenced at the time. Now the chickens have come home to roost and even MSM is starting to realize another mass lockdown would be a literal suicide...or civil war(s) on a worldwide scale.
To add insult to injury the article is calling such selective lockdowns and cost/benefit analyses a "new" thinking on handling the "pandemic" when in reality these concerns were being voiced from the very beginning and mostly ridiculed and/or (il)legally suppressed by the powers that be. It reminds me quite a bit about those studies on treating prostate cancer with testosterone/DHT, which the pharma industry kept calling "paradoxical" and "grounbreaking" despite brutally suppressing evidence/scientists in favor of those exact interventions for more than a century. It probably won't be long before we see articles in MSM titled "Paradoxical benefits from NOT wearing a mask during the pandemic"...
New Thinking on Covid Lockdowns: They’re Overly Blunt and Costly

"...In response to the novel and deadly coronavirus, many governments deployed draconian tactics never used in modern times: severe and broad restrictions on daily activity that helped send the world into its deepest peacetime slump since the Great Depression. The equivalent of 400 million jobs have been lost world-wide, 13 million in the U.S. alone. Global output is on track to fall 5% this year, far worse than during the financial crisis, according to the International Monetary Fund. Despite this steep price, few policy makers felt they had a choice, seeing the economic crisis as a side effect of the health crisis. They ordered nonessential businesses closed and told people to stay home, all without the extensive analysis of benefits and risks that usually precedes a new medical treatment. There wasn’t time to gather that sort of evidence: Faced with a poorly understood and rapidly spreading pathogen, they prioritized saving lives. Five months later, the evidence suggests lockdowns were an overly blunt and economically costly tool. They are politically difficult to keep in place for long enough to stamp out the virus. The evidence also points to alternative strategies that could slow the spread of the epidemic at much less cost. As cases flare up throughout the US, some experts are urging policymakers to pursue these more targeted restrictions and interventions rather than another crippling round of lockdowns."

@Drareg @tankasnowgod @boris @Giraffe @Regina

It's weird that any policy makers thought "they didn't have a choice." The truth is, most (if not all) had zero authority to take ANY of the measures that they did. Many got pushback, not just from citizens and some business owners, but by sheriffs, courts, judges, police, even legislatures. I admire how Governor Kristi Noem handled this, but it's weird that I'm admiring her simply for not committing outright Treason.

I think many of these Governors and Mayors knew they didn't have the authority. Newsom in California, for example, keeps on claiming that masks were mandatory, but he never even issued an "Executive Order" on the issue. He simply pointed to some CA health officer's guidelines.

It's flat out not the job of a Governor, Mayor, President, Senator, Congressman or Council Member to act like a doctor, when they haven't spent time with every patient. Just like it's not the job of a plumber to do surgery. Although, I do think plumbers contribute a lot more to both public and individual health than any public official. And the vast majority of doctors.

Wall Street Journal has been one of the few good news outlets during this. Fox News too, but that really seems to be mostly from their opinion programs. Tucker Carlson had a similar monologue recently-



Peter Hitchens in the Daily Mail, also worth a read-

PETER HITCHENS: The state-sponsored panic of these times has killed more people than Covid ever did | Daily Mail Online

 

[Energizer]

The only regret I can imagine from the Fangsters and Multi-Generational Serial Killers might be if they "regret" putting so many out of work because with a dwindling labor force to parasitize off of, perhaps they might be facing a dwindling of profits in the long term (seemingly their only concern, since morality doesn't even make its way into the article), despite their massive short term profits due to the vaccine marketing campaign. That seems to be the implication of the article.

I think they planned for all of those things.

Yeah, I think you might be right on that. Them hand-waving about lockdowns now is completely out of step with their actions.

 

[Lollipop2]

I just looked up Mae Wan Ho and wow - how the traditional geneticists despise her. I see she has published a number of books - can you recommend one?

Hi @JudiBlueHen I am not Drareg, but you can go on academia.edu and search her name. Most of her work is on there and you can download for free. Ignore the constant push for you to get a paid subscription.

 

[Energizer]

One does not simply read one book by Mae-Wan Ho! All of them are worth reading, imo. I am reading Meaning of Life and The Universe and would recommend it, it's a collection of her most important essays into a cohesive framework and gets very deep beyond just surface-level science, she dives into the philosophical depths into as the title would suggest, the question of What life "is" and what it means, in terms of her view of the organism as a liquid crystalline structure. You can also find most of her essays on her old website, Science in Society Archive. If you're just looking for an introduction to her work on the physics of organisms and her views on biochemistry, I would recommend The Rainbow and The Worm. If you have no background in undergraduate level biochemistry or physics be prepared to have large portions fly over your head (that was the case for me, anyway).

 

[meatbag]

Peru had the tightest, most extreme lockdown and also has the highest number of cases;
The world's toughest lockdown has resulted in the world's highest COVID-19 death toll
The world's toughest lockdown has resulted in the world's highest COVID-19 death toll

hattip to richard nikoley of free the animal;
https://twitter.com/rnikoley

 

[Energizer]

Tougher lockdowns leading to more deaths!? Shocking.

 

[Regina]

Rejoice! The Agora is Growing! — Hive

 

[boris]

It seems like MSM is starting to backtrack on the whole COVID-19 approach. Of course, the presentation is that the destruction of the worldwide economy was done for our benefit but the conclusion by WSJ is still that it was a massive mistake. Reading this WSJ piece feels like such a deja-vu considering these are the exact same issues that we discussed on the forum back in March/April (.e. doing targeted quarantines for vulnerable sub-populations, scrutinizing the benefit of social isolation for controlling the virus or achieving herd immunity, criticism of mask effectiveness, etc) when this fiasco was just starting and a number of vocal forum members kept hysterically insisting that such discussions were a conspiracy theory and the "benevolent" and "expert" authorities surely had taken into account the pros and cons of lockdowns. Well, as it happens so many times, it looks like a risk/benefit analysis was nothing more than wishful thinking and any dissenting voices were silenced at the time. Now the chickens have come home to roost and even MSM is starting to realize another mass lockdown would be a literal suicide...or civil war(s) on a worldwide scale.
To add insult to injury the article is calling such selective lockdowns and cost/benefit analyses a "new" thinking on handling the "pandemic" when in reality these concerns were being voiced from the very beginning and mostly ridiculed and/or (il)legally suppressed by the powers that be. It reminds me quite a bit about those studies on treating prostate cancer with testosterone/DHT, which the pharma industry kept calling "paradoxical" and "grounbreaking" despite brutally suppressing evidence/scientists in favor of those exact interventions for more than a century. It probably won't be long before we see articles in MSM titled "Paradoxical benefits from NOT wearing a mask during the pandemic"...
New Thinking on Covid Lockdowns: They’re Overly Blunt and Costly

"...In response to the novel and deadly coronavirus, many governments deployed draconian tactics never used in modern times: severe and broad restrictions on daily activity that helped send the world into its deepest peacetime slump since the Great Depression. The equivalent of 400 million jobs have been lost world-wide, 13 million in the U.S. alone. Global output is on track to fall 5% this year, far worse than during the financial crisis, according to the International Monetary Fund. Despite this steep price, few policy makers felt they had a choice, seeing the economic crisis as a side effect of the health crisis. They ordered nonessential businesses closed and told people to stay home, all without the extensive analysis of benefits and risks that usually precedes a new medical treatment. There wasn’t time to gather that sort of evidence: Faced with a poorly understood and rapidly spreading pathogen, they prioritized saving lives. Five months later, the evidence suggests lockdowns were an overly blunt and economically costly tool. They are politically difficult to keep in place for long enough to stamp out the virus. The evidence also points to alternative strategies that could slow the spread of the epidemic at much less cost. As cases flare up throughout the US, some experts are urging policymakers to pursue these more targeted restrictions and interventions rather than another crippling round of lockdowns."

@Drareg @tankasnowgod @boris @Giraffe @Regina

I hope that is the direction we are heading, since the other reality (of coronaviruses always having been around) seems to be off the table for them, or rather never been an option in the first place. There are some realistic mainstream articles popping up here and there in the German mainstream throughout the whole last months, but it gets drowned out from the sheer mass of propaganda. The way our German politicians are talking about it is still nowhere near the sound of the WSJ article, it tends to go even more in the opposite direction.


But it still leaves a bitter aftertaste that the better alternative is basically what they have been planing for in the first place:

https://norberthaering.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Scenarios-for-the-Future-ofTechnology-and-International-Development.pdf
Technological innovation in “Lock Step” is largely driven by government and is focused on issues of national security and health and safety. Most technological improvements are created by and for developed countries, shaped by governments’ dual desire to control and to monitor their citizens. In states with poor governance, large-scale projects that fail to progress abound. Technology trends and applications we might see:

• Scanners using advanced functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) technology become the norm at airports and other public areas to detect abnormal behavior that may indicate “antisocial intent.”
• In the aftermath of pandemic scares, smarter packaging for food and beverages is applied first by big companies and producers in a business-to-business environment, and then adopted for individual products and consumers.
• New diagnostics are developed to detect communicable diseases. The application of health screening also changes; screening becomes a prerequisite for release from a hospital or prison, successfully slowing the spread of many diseases.
• Tele-presence technologies respond to the demand for less expensive, lowerbandwidth, sophisticated communications systems for populations whose travel is restricted.
• Driven by protectionism and national security concerns, nations create their own independent, regionally defined IT networks, mimicking China’s firewalls. Governments have varying degrees of success in policing internet traffic, but these efforts nevertheless fracture the “World Wide” Web.

 

[dfspcc20]

@haidut is there a non-paywalled version of the WSJ article anywhere?

 

[haidut]

@haidut is there a non-paywalled version of the WSJ article anywhere?

These may help.
Best Sourcing Unblockers: View Paywalled Articles For Free
How To Get Around Newspaper Paywalls In 2020 Read Article For Free