Coronavirus pandemic

[Flint1979]

If you ask me, I don't really see what's wrong with restricting interstate travel in a time like this. Sure, it's technically unconstitutional, but the Constitution can be bent sometimes in times of emergency.

Michigan has done the exact opposite.

If you're from Detroit (or any other downstate city) you can't go to your cabin "Up North".  But if you're from Chicago it's perfectly OK.

A helpful regulation in theory, but nigh-unenforceable. I don't know if this is one of those questions all Michiganers should know the answer to, but how north is "up north"?

It depends on who you ask. A poll about two years ago from WDIV-TV in Detroit gave 5 of the most popular answers.

1) Zilwaukee Bridge. I only live about 7 miles from that bridge and don't think I consider that the starting point myself.

2) West Branch. A small city about 60 miles north of the Zilwaukee Bridge which is a major stopping off point for trips up north. Lots of restaurants and stores for an I-75 exit in northern Michigan.

3) Draw a line between Flint and Grand Rapids. This is the furthest south I have ever heard of being the southern most point of up north. I'd say draw that line between Bay City and Ludington which won't be a perfectly straight line but it'll be close.

4) Past the tip of the thumb. This one is probably the most logical choice.

5) The Mighty Mac. This choice is too far north for me, by the time you get to the bridge you've already been up north for quite awhile.

[Flint1979]

I say we draw the line using a state highway. Let's use M-46. It crosses the state from east to west completely and some areas in the western part of the state as far south as M-46 already have that up north feel.

[TheGrassGuy]

On the topic of restrictions on interstate travel, China has had checkpoints at the borders of every province or municipality, even before the outbreak started. Like, if you wanted to travel by road from Shanghai municipality to Jiangsu province to the west, you'd have to go through a checkpoint, which doubles as a tollbooth on expressways. I'm not saying that this is a feasible idea for America, but it just goes to show how China might have the outbreak one step ahead of us.

[SEWIGuy]

If you ask me, I don't really see what's wrong with restricting interstate travel in a time like this. Sure, it's technically unconstitutional, but the Constitution can be bent sometimes in times of emergency.

Michigan has done the exact opposite.

If you're from Detroit (or any other downstate city) you can't go to your cabin "Up North".  But if you're from Chicago it's perfectly OK.

What about if you're from Saginaw?

You consider Saginaw "Up North"?  Anyway, it applies to the whole state.  You have to pick a residence and stay there.  So technically someone from Marquette can't go to a vacation home in Saginaw either, no matter how unlikely that example.

All I got to ask anyone is how exactly do you enforce that? Saginaw isn't up North but it's on the fringes of being up north.

Don't know.  Ask the gov.

Makes as much sense to me as the ban on buying vegetable seeds.

A lot of stuff she has said makes no sense to me. I heard there is a ban on buying paint now too. Gretchen is one of two governors I'm not a fan of, the other being the fatass in Illinois.

Nice.

Anyway I know people on the other side of the aisle who believe the Illinois governor is performing very well.

[mgk920]

If you ask me, I don't really see what's wrong with restricting interstate travel in a time like this. Sure, it's technically unconstitutional, but the Constitution can be bent sometimes in times of emergency.

Michigan has done the exact opposite.

If you're from Detroit (or any other downstate city) you can't go to your cabin "Up North".  But if you're from Chicago it's perfectly OK.

What about if you're from Saginaw?

You consider Saginaw "Up North"?  Anyway, it applies to the whole state.  You have to pick a residence and stay there.  So technically someone from Marquette can't go to a vacation home in Saginaw either, no matter how unlikely that example.

Ontonagon or Watersmeet . . . decisions, decisions....



Mike

[LM117]

[SEWIGuy]

If you ask me, I don't really see what's wrong with restricting interstate travel in a time like this. Sure, it's technically unconstitutional, but the Constitution can be bent sometimes in times of emergency.

This is actually much easier to enforce than one might expect. If state X is under such a restriction and borders state Y, state Y authorities can easily identify travelers from state X by spotting cars with state X license plates. Mass transit services between states X and Y can be halted, if they have not been already.

Good luck staffing that with guards  at every state line at every possible state entrance.  That would be a drain on resources for emergency services that could used to do actual work that is necessary right now.  The amount of manpower it would take to pull over, ticket, question, and possible even arrest people with out of state tags would be essentially impossible...maybe even the scenario of actual martial law. 

Besides, lots of "essential workers"  cross state lines every day.  How do you account for those people getting to/from work?  If you end up cutting people off you take away resources and put only more in potential unemployment.  Total non-starter and unrealistic IMO even with how things are going presently.  More so there isn't an unlimited amount of policing power out there that seems to be a popular notion.

Maybe not every crossing... Maybe only the interstates. But if they discourage out-of-state travel (even after other guidelines are lifted), I wonder how many people would try wheedling around the rules.

Not only is this impractical, but it is is also more dangerous.  So then people are going to get off the highway and find a two lane crossing, stopping in small towns, etc.

And what do you do about the essential worker who works in Illinois but lives in Wisconsin?  I drove to O'Hare (from Wisconsin) to pick up a family member returning from overseas.  How do you manage this?  And my guess is that most of the unnecessary travel is not happening across state lines, but locally. 

It would be an incredibly wasteful use of resources.  The best thing to do is to encourage people to stay home.  Not to set up roadblocks at state lines. 

[ftballfan]

If you ask me, I don't really see what's wrong with restricting interstate travel in a time like this. Sure, it's technically unconstitutional, but the Constitution can be bent sometimes in times of emergency.

This is actually much easier to enforce than one might expect. If state X is under such a restriction and borders state Y, state Y authorities can easily identify travelers from state X by spotting cars with state X license plates. Mass transit services between states X and Y can be halted, if they have not been already.

Good luck staffing that with guards  at every state line at every possible state entrance.  That would be a drain on resources for emergency services that could used to do actual work that is necessary right now.  The amount of manpower it would take to pull over, ticket, question, and possible even arrest people with out of state tags would be essentially impossible...maybe even the scenario of actual martial law. 

Besides, lots of "essential workers"  cross state lines every day.  How do you account for those people getting to/from work?  If you end up cutting people off you take away resources and put only more in potential unemployment.  Total non-starter and unrealistic IMO even with how things are going presently.  More so there isn't an unlimited amount of policing power out there that seems to be a popular notion.

Maybe not every crossing... Maybe only the interstates. But if they discourage out-of-state travel (even after other guidelines are lifted), I wonder how many people would try wheedling around the rules.

Not only is this impractical, but it is is also more dangerous.  So then people are going to get off the highway and find a two lane crossing, stopping in small towns, etc.

And what do you do about the essential worker who works in Illinois but lives in Wisconsin?  I drove to O'Hare (from Wisconsin) to pick up a family member returning from overseas.  How do you manage this?  And my guess is that most of the unnecessary travel is not happening across state lines, but locally. 

It would be an incredibly wasteful use of resources.  The best thing to do is to encourage people to stay home.  Not to set up roadblocks at state lines. 

I agree that roadblocks would be a wasteful use of resources, especially considering there are likely hundreds of roads (or even thousands in some cases) that cross state lines. The two areas that I've heard of doing roadblocks (Dare County, NC and Monroe County, FL) have two things that make them unique: (1) There's one or two roads in or out and (2) These areas have used roadblocks before (during hurricanes)

[GaryV]

If you ask me, I don't really see what's wrong with restricting interstate travel in a time like this. Sure, it's technically unconstitutional, but the Constitution can be bent sometimes in times of emergency.

Michigan has done the exact opposite.

If you're from Detroit (or any other downstate city) you can't go to your cabin "Up North".  But if you're from Chicago it's perfectly OK.

A helpful regulation in theory, but nigh-unenforceable. I don't know if this is one of those questions all Michiganers should know the answer to, but how north is "up north"?

My answer always was where you start to see the white bark birch trees - native, not those planted in someone's yard.

M-46 as suggested somewhat works, except it puts most of Saginaw and all of Bay City and Midland "up north", and I disagree with that.

[Flint1979]

If you ask me, I don't really see what's wrong with restricting interstate travel in a time like this. Sure, it's technically unconstitutional, but the Constitution can be bent sometimes in times of emergency.

Michigan has done the exact opposite.

If you're from Detroit (or any other downstate city) you can't go to your cabin "Up North".  But if you're from Chicago it's perfectly OK.

What about if you're from Saginaw?

You consider Saginaw "Up North"?  Anyway, it applies to the whole state.  You have to pick a residence and stay there.  So technically someone from Marquette can't go to a vacation home in Saginaw either, no matter how unlikely that example.

All I got to ask anyone is how exactly do you enforce that? Saginaw isn't up North but it's on the fringes of being up north.

Don't know.  Ask the gov.

Makes as much sense to me as the ban on buying vegetable seeds.

A lot of stuff she has said makes no sense to me. I heard there is a ban on buying paint now too. Gretchen is one of two governors I'm not a fan of, the other being the fatass in Illinois.

Nice.

Anyway I know people on the other side of the aisle who believe the Illinois governor is performing very well.

I don't know how he's doing to a tee but I just never liked the guy from day one.

[Flint1979]

If you ask me, I don't really see what's wrong with restricting interstate travel in a time like this. Sure, it's technically unconstitutional, but the Constitution can be bent sometimes in times of emergency.

Michigan has done the exact opposite.

If you're from Detroit (or any other downstate city) you can't go to your cabin "Up North".  But if you're from Chicago it's perfectly OK.

A helpful regulation in theory, but nigh-unenforceable. I don't know if this is one of those questions all Michiganers should know the answer to, but how north is "up north"?

My answer always was where you start to see the white bark birch trees - native, not those planted in someone's yard.

M-46 as suggested somewhat works, except it puts most of Saginaw and all of Bay City and Midland "up north", and I disagree with that.

The line could be sent a little north, east of M-66 perhaps taking it east again when it crosses M-61 but that might be slightly too far north as it would cut Wixom Lake out. Saginaw, Midland and Bay City aren't up north to me either and none of the Thumb feels like up north except maybe along the northern rim of the Thumb on the lakeshore. Mount Pleasant doesn't have an up north feel to it either but Clare kind of does.

[SEWIGuy]

If you ask me, I don't really see what's wrong with restricting interstate travel in a time like this. Sure, it's technically unconstitutional, but the Constitution can be bent sometimes in times of emergency.

Michigan has done the exact opposite.

If you're from Detroit (or any other downstate city) you can't go to your cabin "Up North".  But if you're from Chicago it's perfectly OK.

What about if you're from Saginaw?

You consider Saginaw "Up North"?  Anyway, it applies to the whole state.  You have to pick a residence and stay there.  So technically someone from Marquette can't go to a vacation home in Saginaw either, no matter how unlikely that example.

All I got to ask anyone is how exactly do you enforce that? Saginaw isn't up North but it's on the fringes of being up north.

Don't know.  Ask the gov.

Makes as much sense to me as the ban on buying vegetable seeds.

A lot of stuff she has said makes no sense to me. I heard there is a ban on buying paint now too. Gretchen is one of two governors I'm not a fan of, the other being the fatass in Illinois.

Nice.

Anyway I know people on the other side of the aisle who believe the Illinois governor is performing very well.

I don't know how he's doing to a tee but I just never liked the guy from day one.

Oh.

So maybe in a thread about a specific topic you should do some research on what he has done and/or hasn't done, before you make a statement about him while also making fun of his weight.

[formulanone]

And, I prefer advertisers knowing enough about me to tailor advertisements to me.  Much better than having irrelevant stuff thrown at me.

While it feels pathetic when it's repetitively wrong (mortgages, dental implants, and bowel cleansing), I do have to admit...it's actually quite funny when the tailored advertisements get it so very wrong (not sure why they think I'm into keeping pigeons or building my own fireworks platforms, as examples). I guess I'm winning the war on my own misinformation about correct information.

I often wonder if those that are most vocal about privacy concerns are those who struggle to find importance or significance in life.  Assigning value to personal data is a way of feeling more significant.

I don't know if there's a direct correlation to that - seems like simplistic pop psychology - after all, one's private data (that is, one individual) is probably worth less than one cent. Oh, we all want privacy and can't stand someone managing one's identity in a way, and that's something we can all agree on. The overall financial aspect of your online identity coming down to the value of a used coupon is really what makes people really angry, and then re-sold again and again to the tune of a dollar or two. Sadly, one is worth more as a statistical value against other data and trends, than as few random dust mite's droppings of data.

If people are smart about managing their online identity; not assigning a place to everything they do and see in the moment, careful not to give out too much information, not telling the world about every little thing they buy, there's not much to be gained nor lost. If the plethora of useless emails, texts, and is anything to go by, they're honestly not getting any better about figuring me out.

That's not to say that a lot of information isn't compiled about us but re-assembly of all your information (even if it genuinely is stored in massive data warehouses) might take a while, as it's created in larger batches than can probably be sorted. That might get weird in the next decade or so; a more-genuine/more-disingenuous avatar of ourselves exists as online storage because that's who we are now, but it's probably always going to be distorted.

tl;dr I can see where someone doesn't want a part of it, but I don't think my data is specifically valuable compared to what I get out of it / put into it for 1-5 minutes a day.

[J N Winkler]

Speaking for myself, I am very unresponsive to advertising in general . . .

This is veering way off topic, but out of idle curiosity, how do you know this is true?

The last time I got into something as a result of a Facebook ad, it was Outlander back in autumn 2018.

I've also developed an understanding of the kind of advertising that I find hard to resist.  For example, I continue to use Pennzoil Platinum (a full-synthetic oil) for the family cars not because I have checked the specs recently, but rather because back in 2015 Pennzoil was selling it with visuals of clean and new-looking piston skirts following Sequence IIIG tests.  Sequence IIIG uses a 3.8 L GM V6 and no car I have ever owned has had one (the closest I have come is 3.0 L V6 engines in a 1986 Nissan Maxima and a 2005 Toyota Camry).  It also involves running the engine nonstop at 3000 RPM for hours; there is no way I could ever do that in top gear on the public highway.  But, even though I would likely experience no noticeable sludging or performance loss over 20+ years if I used cheaper conventional oils, the visuals of clean metal still light up my brain.  (It helps that I did have experience of using Mobil 1 with the Maxima back in the nineties and seeing one of the camshafts, which was visible through the oil filler hole, go from dark brown to a pale gold color over a few tens of thousands of miles.)  This is the kind of material which, although it has clearly been massaged for marketing purposes, doesn't make it into Facebook videos or pay-per-click ads.

[vdeane]

It's worth noting that there's a lot more to tracking than meets the eye.  Most websites don't just host dumb banner ads anymore - they're part of ad networks, and one of the things the advertising companies do is use things like tracking cookies and other technologies to build a profile about you that includes things like every website you visit, everything you search for on Google (who is actually one of the biggest businesses in the advertising business, especially after the DoubleClick acquisition), your Facebook (which is known to build shadow profiles for advertising purposes even for people who don't have accounts on the website) activity, etc.  This is why so much of targeted advertising consists of things people have already bought.  This information is then regularly traded among the companies.

This should be concerning for anyone.  It's amazing what can be reconstructed from data.  Know a few search terms, correlate location history to doctor's offices, etc., and you can figure out what medical conditions a person has.  Even "anonymized" data can often be tied back to a specific person with a small amount of work.  Imagine what would happen if one of these companies had a data breach.  Moreover, you don't have 4th Amendment protections on the data these companies have.  The government can ask Google for all the information they have on you and aren't even required to tell you about it (in fact, they can specifically order Google not to tell you).  If you wouldn't want the government collecting the data, you shouldn't want private companies to do so either, since it's basically the same thing these days, especially with how many private companies the NSA works with.

[hotdogPi]

It's worth noting that there's a lot more to tracking than meets the eye.  Most websites don't just host dumb banner ads anymore - they're part of ad networks, and one of the things the advertising companies do is use things like tracking cookies and other technologies to build a profile about you that includes things like every website you visit, everything you search for on Google (who is actually one of the biggest businesses in the advertising business, especially after the DoubleClick acquisition), your Facebook (which is known to build shadow profiles for advertising purposes even for people who don't have accounts on the website) activity, etc.  This is why so much of targeted advertising consists of things people have already bought.  This information is then regularly traded among the companies.

This should be concerning for anyone.  It's amazing what can be reconstructed from data.  Know a few search terms, correlate location history to doctor's offices, etc., and you can figure out what medical conditions a person has.  Even "anonymized" data can often be tied back to a specific person with a small amount of work.  Imagine what would happen if one of these companies had a data breach.  Moreover, you don't have 4th Amendment protections on the data these companies have.  The government can ask Google for all the information they have on you and aren't even required to tell you about it (in fact, they can specifically order Google not to tell you).  If you wouldn't want the government collecting the data, you shouldn't want private companies to do so either, since it's basically the same thing these days, especially with how many private companies the NSA works with.

The alternative is to have pretty much every website cost money to join or even read. (Wikipedia would be an exception.)

[vdeane]

Not necessarily.  Non-targeted advertising exists (and given that personally targeted advertising has always been more of a promise in effectiveness than a reality, I would think it wouldn't be as much less profitable than one would think), and then there's the middle of the road path by knowing your site's audience and targeting your advertising to your demographic, like what's done on twit.tv.

[jeffandnicole]

The alternative is to have pretty much every website cost money to join or even read. (Wikipedia would be an exception.)

Why single out Wiki? They're still advertising - for donations.

[webny99]

The New York Times has become effectively paywalled, which is unfortunate, because they're usually great with data journalism and often have fascinating visuals and interactives, like this one.  But I do wish people were more cognizant of the paywall when linking to it... that is, unless it's just me with the paywall problem. I've almost started to think so, with the volume of links to the NYT vs. other known paywall sites.

[hotdogPi]

The New York Times has become effectively paywalled, which is unfortunate, because they're usually great with data journalism and often have fascinating visuals and interactives, like this one.  But I do wish people were more cognizant of the paywall when linking to it... that is, unless it's just me with the paywall problem. I've almost started to think so, with the volume of links to the NYT vs. other known paywall sites.

The New York Times has made all of their coronavirus information free.

[Hot Rod Hootenanny]

If you ask me, I don't really see what's wrong with restricting interstate travel in a time like this. Sure, it's technically unconstitutional, but the Constitution can be bent sometimes in times of emergency.

Michigan has done the exact opposite.

If you're from Detroit (or any other downstate city) you can't go to your cabin "Up North".  But if you're from Chicago it's perfectly OK.

A helpful regulation in theory, but nigh-unenforceable. I don't know if this is one of those questions all Michiganers should know the answer to, but how north is "up north"?

My answer always was where you start to see the white bark birch trees - native, not those planted in someone's yard.

M-46 as suggested somewhat works, except it puts most of Saginaw and all of Bay City and Midland "up north", and I disagree with that.

The line could be sent a little north, east of M-66 perhaps taking it east again when it crosses M-61 but that might be slightly too far north as it would cut Wixom Lake out. Saginaw, Midland and Bay City aren't up north to me either and none of the Thumb feels like up north except maybe along the northern rim of the Thumb on the lakeshore. Mount Pleasant doesn't have an up north feel to it either but Clare kind of does.

Let me solve the "Up North" and Michigan problem.
If the place is located north of the Indiana Toll Road, or the Ohio Turnpike, then the location is considered "Up North" by 3/4th of the United States.

You're welcome from the state that actually owns Michigan.

[Rothman]

SD's Governor has taken the route of inaction, thus letting the infection spread in her state when it is now plateauing or declining in others.  WTG.

[Flint1979]

If you ask me, I don't really see what's wrong with restricting interstate travel in a time like this. Sure, it's technically unconstitutional, but the Constitution can be bent sometimes in times of emergency.

Michigan has done the exact opposite.

If you're from Detroit (or any other downstate city) you can't go to your cabin "Up North".  But if you're from Chicago it's perfectly OK.

A helpful regulation in theory, but nigh-unenforceable. I don't know if this is one of those questions all Michiganers should know the answer to, but how north is "up north"?

My answer always was where you start to see the white bark birch trees - native, not those planted in someone's yard.

M-46 as suggested somewhat works, except it puts most of Saginaw and all of Bay City and Midland "up north", and I disagree with that.

The line could be sent a little north, east of M-66 perhaps taking it east again when it crosses M-61 but that might be slightly too far north as it would cut Wixom Lake out. Saginaw, Midland and Bay City aren't up north to me either and none of the Thumb feels like up north except maybe along the northern rim of the Thumb on the lakeshore. Mount Pleasant doesn't have an up north feel to it either but Clare kind of does.

Let me solve the "Up North" and Michigan problem.
If the place is located north of the Indiana Toll Road, or the Ohio Turnpike, then the location is considered "Up North" by 3/4th of the United States.

You're welcome from the state that actually owns Michigan.

That isn't solving it in the least bit.

[1995hoo]

We are at Arlington National Cemetery for my father's inurnment this afternoon. First time I've ever done this for a funeral (Arlington specifically requests attendees cover their faces right now). Hope I never have to again.

[TheGrassGuy]

We might have to be dealing with social distancing till 2022...
https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/14/some-social-distancing-may-be-needed-into-2022-to-keep-coronavirus-in-check-new-study-says/