I'm more sanguine. I live on a busy Brooklyn street which is normally packed with people shoulder to shoulder during the day, and I will see maybe 5-10 people on the block at what should be the busiest time. I think it's like a 90%-95% reduction which is certainly substantial enough to quench the spread enough to reduce the shock hospitals are receiving.
Doing my part (I have asthma), I haven't left the apartment since Sunday :^)
But for how long? The stricter the quarantine the longer we have to quarantine to reduce spread. That's the problem. Best estimate is we can reduce daily interactions by 70%, for the next 12-18 months.
The exponential function is a terrifying beast. Any alternatives we don't know now are irrelevant. There is a reason why NYC is bracing for impact: a tsunami of new cases are about to slam into the healthcare system.
Usually Hacker News middlebrow skepticism is just in poor taste. On this topic, it is foolish and farcical. One of our doctor friends is already telling us that her hospital is under stress and she's not in one of the hardest hit states.
I did not say eliminate the shock. I said reduce the shock. Epidemiological reports support the hypothesis that this level of social distancing is effective to reduce r. When exponential functions are involved, even small improvements pay off big in the long run.
Doing my part (I have asthma), I haven't left the apartment since Sunday :^)