Scott Alexander shares insights gained from writing a comprehensive post on lockdown effectiveness, highlighting the complexities and challenges of analyzing such a multifaceted issue. Longer summary

Scott Alexander reflects on writing a comprehensive post about lockdown effectiveness during the COVID-19 pandemic. He discusses the challenges of addressing such a complex, multi-dimensional issue, including the difficulty of comparing different types of costs, the limitations of mathematical models, and the potential for bias in academic research. Scott also notes the varying pandemic experiences across different countries and regions, and the surprising involvement of rationalists and effective altruists in lockdown studies. He emphasizes the importance of considering alternative approaches beyond the typical pro/anti-lockdown debate, and the value of cross-disciplinary research in addressing complex issues. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander shares his voting choices for California elections and ballot measures, offering brief explanations and occasional humor for each decision. Longer summary

Scott Alexander discusses his preliminary choices for California elected positions and ballot initiatives. He provides brief justifications for his votes on various positions including Governor, Lieutenant Governor, State Controller, and others. He also analyzes several propositions on the ballot, explaining the issues and his reasoning for each vote. The post is a mix of serious policy analysis and humorous commentary on California politics. Shorter summary

Scott Alexander criticizes misleading media reports on drug testing welfare recipients, showing how flawed methods and misrepresented data led to false conclusions about drug use rates. Longer summary

Scott Alexander critiques media coverage of drug testing programs for welfare recipients in Tennessee and Florida. He points out that the widely reported extremely low drug use rates (0.12% in Tennessee) are due to flawed testing methods, not actual low drug use. The Tennessee program only used a written questionnaire, while Florida's program, which used urine tests, was misrepresented by not accounting for those who refused testing. Alexander argues that these misleading reports are worse than Brian Williams' helicopter story embellishment because they misinform on important policy issues and display arrogance in criticizing those who believe welfare recipients use drugs at higher rates. Shorter summary