Except that the discussion is common ... it's all about the concept of flattening the curve to reduce the peak and thereby not exceed the capacity of the health service.
It's the same data, it's the same idea, it's the same argument, but from a different source.
It's also all now all over the place ... I could find 8 or 10 different sites to submit, all with the same message. Is it useful then to have 8 or 10 discussion on HN all hacking over the same ground, all making the same points, all having the same "insights" and disagreements?
I think not, and that's why I linked this submission to the existing discussion.
I don't think you've looked at the linked page in this case. It's not what you think it is, and the difference in the two discussions also reflects that.
It's the same data, it's the same idea, it's the same argument, but from a different source.
It's also all now all over the place ... I could find 8 or 10 different sites to submit, all with the same message. Is it useful then to have 8 or 10 discussion on HN all hacking over the same ground, all making the same points, all having the same "insights" and disagreements?
I think not, and that's why I linked this submission to the existing discussion.