frankilin roosevelt

It's not about being liberal or conservative anymore y'all. That is a hype offered by the fascist whores who want to confuse the people with lies while they turn this country into an aristocratic police state. Some people will say anything to attain power and money. There is no such thing as the Liberal Media, but the Corporate media is very real.

Check out my old  Voice of the People page.

Gino Napoli
San Francisco, California
High School Math Teacher

Loyalty without truth
is a trail to tyranny.

a middle-aged
George Washington

1655 POSTS

February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
May 2022
April 2022
February 2022
January 2022
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
September 2016
August 2016
May 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
September 2014
August 2014
May 2014
March 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
August 2012
July 2012
April 2012
March 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
August 2010
July 2010
March 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
August 2009
July 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
June 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
June 2005
May 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004

Thursday, 19 March 2020 at 17h 10m 22s

SF Infections jump from 51 to 70

Click here for my regression model update. a = 2.59 b = 0.138954 which projects into 1,120.68 over 2 weeks (using the method I explained in an earlier post) AND 2,786.29 after 3 weeks.

1,120.68 = 70×2.59×(1+.138954)^14

2,786.29 = 70×2.59×(1+.138954)^21

That may not seem like a lot, but that cannot include the ancillary infections that are occuring because people are asymptomatic, so we don't really have good data on the rate of infection. That's why the growth rate of the model fluctuates, now at 13.89% increase per day. If the latest number (70) is actually 75, the model jumps to a 14.7% increase per day.

9:16 a.m. San Francisco now has 70 confirmed COVID-19 cases: San Francisco announced there are 70 confirmed cases of COVID-19 in the city, an increase from 51 on Wednesday, according to the Department of Health.

[SOURCE: San Francisco Chronicle | 19 March 2020]

Wednesday, 18 March 2020 at 19h 33m 48s

I am updating an exponential model of the data from SF

Here is the latest desmos update from San Francisco.

There were 8 more cases of COVID-19 released at 9:58 am today by the City Department of Public Health. The model is now 3.685 times the number of cases with an 11.88% rate of increase per day ... from 3.82 and 11.6 as of yesterday.

Here is an image

So for instance, running those numbers, I get 1,986 infected over another 3 weeks. Here's how. 1 + .1188 = the growth factor. Raise that to the 21st power (3 weeks) and multiply 51 (the current number). Then multiply 3.685 which the model estimates as the number of unknown infected cases. That's how I got 1,986.

The above analysis comes with huge reservations because the lack of testing leaves us blind. We have no idea how many unknown carriers are out there. Hence that multiple of 3.685 from the model is not reliable. If it is actaully 5, then we arrive at 3,564 cases after 3 weeks, a lot of whom likely infected other people over that duration. Currently it appears the doubling rate is over 5 days, which implies 24,821 cases over another 2 weeks. Full disclosure: I got that by doing 2 raised to the 14/5 power and multiplying to 3,564.

Once you start doubling big numbers over 5 or less days (like what happened in Italy) we got a real health crisis even if the mortality rate is between 1 and 2 percent. If half of the 350 million US population contracts this, 1% of 175 million is 1.75 million people dead. That is more in one year than all of the combined total casualties of war for the United States dating back to the Revolutionary war.

Poof ... mind is blown.

Wednesday, 18 March 2020 at 0h 23m 32s


Be thankful that our health authorities and government leaders made the decisions they made. This is not a hoax. The threat is real.

Tuesday, 17 March 2020 at 20h 5m 56s

British study on Covid-19

Click here to read the sobering report yourself.

President Trump’s surprisingly sober press conference on Monday was reportedly sparked by a British study suggesting that the U.S. could face 2.2 million fatalities if the coronavirus epidemic goes unabated.

The report ... was put together by a team of epidemiologists at Imperial College London.

[SOURCE: Josh Kovensky | | 17 March 2020]

Tuesday, 17 March 2020 at 19h 44m 7s

I am updating an exponential model of the data from SF

Click here for a Desmos exponential regression model that I am doing with data that is daily released from San Francisco.

Right now, the a value is how many times more people are probably infected. The b value is the percentage of increase in the rate of infections. Add one to get a growth factor. Multiply the a value to the current number of infections to get an estimate of the actual number infected. Then use the initial value multiplied to the growth factor raised to the 14th power to model how many infections are possible at a minimum.

Hence, I get 768 infected, if we assume that the current actions of "shelter at home" and "social distancing" have had a mitigating effect. An 11.6% is based solely upon the current low rate of testing that has occurred. More likely over the rest of the week, that rate of increase will be higher.

For instance if that last data point goes from 43 to just 50, the rate of increase goes from 11.6% to 13.28% and the initial "a" value becomes 3. Doing that calcultion, 3 times 50 multiplied to the growth factor of 1.1328 to the 14th power ... you get 859 people infected after 2 weeks.

Notice how quickly the expansion can occur just by going to 43 to 50. 768 becomes 859.

I bet it's more like 150 (because of the a value). If you put that in the model, the rate of increase becomes 54% -- which translates (hold your breath) into 63,296 infected after 2 weeks.

Holy shit. That's why this is serious. Because that 63,296 is more likely already baked in, and would become 1.3 million by the end of the 3rd week if nothing had been done.

UPDATE ON METHOD: I am using an exponential model on the statistical data using euler's constant ( y=ae^bx ) in order to obtain parameters that I use in a growth factor exponential model ( y=a(1+b)^x ) in order to get the best and worst case scenarios.

Monday, 16 March 2020 at 23h 50m 50s

The Covid-19 Recession

This is called "Flattening the Pandemic and Recession Curves", presented at Princeton University by UC Berkeley Economics Professor Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas. The lecture is a good discussion about how the means of containing and eliminating the pandemic are related to the inevitable recession.

In a perfect world, people would self-isolate until infection rates decline sufficiently and public health authorities give the all-clear ...

The first thing to note is that, even in that "perfect" world, the economic damage would be considerable. To see this, assume that, relative to a baseline, containment measures reduce economic activity by 50% for one month and 25% for another month, after which the economy returns to the baseline...

That scenario would still deliver a massive blow to headline GDP numbers, with a decline in annual output growth of the order of 6.5% relative to the previous year. Extend the 25% shutdown for just one more month and the decline in annual output growth (relative to the previous year) reaches almost 10%.

As a number of economists have pointed out, most of this lost GDP will not be coming back, so it is reasonable to assume a return to the baseline, rather than a later surge ... We are about to witness a downturn that could dwarf the "Great Recession" [of 2008-09]

[SOURCE: Pierre-Olivier Gourinchas | Professor of Economics, UC Berkeley | 13 March 2020]

Monday, 16 March 2020 at 21h 56m 19s

SF Chronicle suspends it's paywall

Click here for live updates

Sunday, 15 March 2020 at 20h 38m 8s

See the data as it comes

Covid-19 tracker by state

Holy shit. This thing is hitting every state at once and is beginning to exponentially grow.

Sunday, 15 March 2020 at 21h 1m 8s

I cannot stress this enough

This is a communication to TalkingPointsMemo from a Bay Area hospital worker.

Sunday, 15 March 2020 at 21h 8m 6s

Exponential Growth

The Math behind social distancing (from

In an earlier post I used the data from Italy (which is a good example of what can happen in the Bay Area) to discern that a 19% daily rate of increase and 6.5% of current cases known is quite possible. Which means there are people walking around spreading the disease who do not realize it for 3 or more days before they start feeling the symptoms. Already San Francisco has gone from 21 to 28 to 37 in a matter of 3 days. That's called exponential growth, which can very quickly reach 1,000 depending on the underlying growth rate, which cannot be measured effectively since we very likely are only aware of 6.5% of cases (see above).

So if 37 is only 6.5% of the actual cases, that means we have 569 now. And if that increases at the rate of 1.32 (37/28) for 2 weeks, we are looking at 27,742 cases -- and this assumes the general population takes preventative actions now, because if that rate of growth expands for 3 weeks, we are looking at 193,715 cases by early April, 5% or more of whom will possibly die (at least 9,685).

[SOURCE: Ida Mojadad | San Francisco Examiner | 15 March 2020]

Look what is happening in New York City right now (from the new york post).

New York City’s coronavirus cases have skyrocketed in less than a week from 25 on Monday to 269 Sunday as Mayor Bill de Blasio considers locking down the Big Apple to contain the outbreak.

“Every option is on the table in a crisis,” de Blasio said Sunday morning on CNN.

“We’ve never seen anything like this,” he said.

De Blasio expects the city’s coronavirus tally to rise to 1,000 in the next few days.

“It’s changing every hour so we’re going to constantly make new decisions,” de Blasio said about the dynamic public health emergency.

[SOURCE: Julia Marsh | New York Post | 15 March 2020]

Here are live updates from USATODAY

I know it sounds rash but I would be staying at home and not going anywhere unless you need to. No hanging out at cafe's and bars and going to restaurants, because otherwise you will be responsible for potentially spreading the virus to vulnerable populations -- in addition to yourself.

I live in a building with a lot of elderly people. We touch the same doorknobs, stairway bannisters, and use the same elevator.