Social media can be both fun and useful. Over the weekend, we were exploring a few different design options for an address sign at Mackay Laneway House and so I posted this image on Twitter and storied it on Instagram. I got a bunch of responses, as well as some great suggestions. And we ultimately ended up making a small change to the design. That process was both fun and useful. The final design is now out for pricing and production.

But as we all know, there is also a dark side to social media. The algorithms that power social media have been optimized to amplify whatever drives the most engagement. Oftentimes that means whatever gets people the most enraged. In this recent NY Times article, Stuart A. Thompson and Charlie Warzel make a compelling argument that Facebook has actually been coaxing many Americans into taking more extreme views on the platform -- it made them more popular.

And we're not talking about extreme views on home address signs.

Back in March and April, there was a belief that big and dense cities were going to pose a serious problem in the fight against COVID-19. The narrative was that the benefits of urban density suddenly flip to glaring negatives during a pandemic. Elevators are a problem. Public transit is a problem. Busy streets and public spaces are a problem. Instead of density, you want dispersion. There was also some speculation that COVID-19 cases would be somewhat correlated with colder climates.

The data that we are seeing today suggests the opposite. Note the above chart by Axios. On a per capita basis, COVID-19 cases are now the lowest -- and below the national average -- in large US cities with populations greater than 1 million people. Where cases are the highest, again on a per capita basis, is in rural areas. Non-metro areas less than 10,000 people. The county with the highest rate also isn't the coldest of places. It's Childress County, Texas, where the rate is about 1,265.3 cases per 100,000 people.

I have a lot of questions about the most important factors affecting transmission rates. Is mask wearing, for example, more important than average temperatures? What is the impact of socio-economic status? I am seeing maps that, unfortunately, suggest this plays a meaningful role. What is really driving these so-called "hot spots?" But what seems clear to me is that density is not necessarily destiny during this pandemic.

P.S. Here's a related article on hospital capacities across the United States.

Chart: Axios

Seeing people out at bars and at amusements parks in this WSJ video about Wuhan, China is a little odd given that in this part of the world we are decisively in our second wave. But that is what is happening. In fact, the title of the video is, "Wuhan, Former Pandemic Center, Emerges as Tourist Hot Spot."

Over a recent public holiday, the city saw nearly 19 million tourists -- the most of any Chinese city. And while tourist revenues are still thought to be down by some 30%, Chinese people are seemingly feeling confident enough to get back out and do things.

Based on what the WSJ is reporting, this seems to be supported by a few things. International travel isn't happening, so it's becoming a boon for local tourism, which is not that dissimilar from what's happening in other countries. (Domestic air travel is rebounding faster than international travel when you look at flight volumes across major airlines.)

At the same time, Wuhan implemented what sounds like some pretty extensive testing, which is in turn supported by a national healthcare platform that presumably makes contact tracing easier. These things seem to have given people the confidence to go out again. And I don't doubt that the same will eventually happen in the rest of the world.