I got a Covid-19 shot today thanks to Ben Cohen, a subreddit and an early rising daughter

It's a real testament to how much the current system sucks that they didn't design it to block bots. (Or provide a documented API with rate limiting.)

Their needs are being addressed by other systems that don't account for the WHY NOT MEEE NOWWW crowd's whinging about computers.

Thousands were vaccinated in Lawrence and Brocton this week. Homebound elders are being brought their vaccines in several communities where isolation is an issue.

You don't see that, I do.

It makes you wonder.

From Baker’s companion policy to his redirection of doses from hospitals and community health centers to remote mass vaccination sites added to the website nightmare, the needs of the disadvantaged have been mostly ignored.

Public uproar has put pressure on him and it looks like it may start to have some effect. We'll see in the next few weeks.

Resource scarcity isn't a new thing. There's many ways to solve the problem but either way, people are going to need to wait for the reasons you mention: There just isn't the supply.

A better website would allow someone to register once and not need to keep checking daily. The website back-end would randomly assign people to slots as they become available, perhaps weighting based on some additional factors. But since there's 1,000,000 eligible people and only ~30,000 slots a day, people are going to need to wait for weeks.

The alternative is the current system whereby people click refresh every few seconds (or have a bot) and eventually they'll get lucky.

“And I have also had it up to here with armchair logisticians“

Uh oh, somebody’s in trouble now!

The point above was that you could have a system where we could have everyone start signing up now, and by entering some basic information (date of birth and health issues/conditions that might impact the algorithm) you could generate a list of what order people should get the vaccine. Your all caps histrionics about "THE UNPREDICTABLE AND INADEQUATE SUPPLY OF VACCINE" does not change the fact that the system described is still viable and the vaccine supply would just be one thing that is factored into the design of the system's operation.

For the sake of simplifying the argument let's say that we have five million people registered through such a system (including people who can register by phone where someone else will enter the data if they do not have internet access and they will be contacted by phone as well). If the state currently had one million doses the first million people on the list get to make appointments right away. When the state has another million doses on the way then the next million people on the list get notification to set up an appointment. For the scenario described above it is all about developing a prioritization system, that "THERE IS NOT ENOUGH VACCINE AND NOT ENOUGH INFO ON WHAT THE FEDS WILL SEND" is irrelevant because the system would simply open up to people on the list as it becomes available based on that priority ranking. None of that prevents a parallel system of access to people who are afraid to enter that system through community centers where they can walk in and get it without the data entry requirement.

I've seen your comments on here for years, and while you often add a lot to the conversation I also think sometimes you have blinders on and don't actually consider what is being written. That's what leads to things like your comment here where you jump right into your "I have experience in something related to what you're talking about so now you will listen to me be the expert!" mode while completely missing the point. That's obvious when the comment you're replying to even acknowledges that there is insufficient supply at the end.

As I have mentioned before I am neck deep in the distribution side of this.

And I have also had it up to here with armchair logisticians

THE CENTRAL PROBLEM IS THE UNPREDICTABLE AND INADEQUATE SUPPLY OF VACCINE. PERIOD

Taking those in reverse order....

Supply issues (and the solving of them) do not preclude having a better registration/tracking system, and in fact would even be helped by having a better registration/tracking system.

We've had examples in this saga - here and in NY, at least, probably other places too - of armchair logisticians and amateurs coming up with better ways to do things.

...and the more you stamp your feet and yell about you being "in the know" and not simply referring people to the official sources - the more I'm reminded of the many good professionals I know in many fields who work in public (state and federal) agencies and departments and contractors who leave the talking (especially in life-and-death situations) to the designated people in the food chain and don't spend their time lobbing social media grenades about "where the problem is" and the less credence I'm inclined to give anything you say.

If so, they could create a secondary market and sell appointments.

That is exactly what I'm concerned about.

I’m 65, but I’d rather see older people getting vaxxed to the max before we roll out to my age

Age is only one vulnerability factor, and vulnerability/likelihood of severe disease is only one reason to prioritize people for vaccination. While you're gunning for "people who think that maybe some time years ago they tried a cigarette", did you forget that "first responders" were prioritized ahead of those 75+? The reasoning is because they come into contact with many people, and vaccinating them minimizes the spread. Thus, it goes back and forth: first covid-facing medical staff, then some vulnerable people, then more medical staff and first responders, then more vulnerable people - that's where we are now. Next step of phase 2 is workers with frequent contact: grocery, transit, teachers, etc. None of it is perfect, but it all has reasoning behind it.

And as far as "people who think that maybe some time years ago they tried a cigarette" - there are a lot of people whose medical conditions make them very vulnerable to severe disease. You are always free to refrain from getting vaccinated if you do not feel that you are vulnerable, but it's probably best if you don't second-guess the needs of others.

If you have comorbidities caused by your smoking, yes. That’s legit.

Just being a smoker is not a risk factor. Plenty of smokers, especially the young ones, have yet to develop COPD, cancer, heart disease, etc. Some never do.

Why did they chose to allow smokers yet not those routinely exposed to secondhand smoke in the home, workplace, etc?

The list should be restricted to genuine comorbidities. It should not include behaviors that potentially can lead to them.

YOU don't need to start smoking again to qualify, as far as I understand it.

The state website lists "smoking" as a hyperlink to the CDC website which states: "Being a current or former cigarette smoker increases your risk of severe illness from COVID-19."

Is it really "gaming the system" when you can only by absolute literal definition describe what we have set up here as a "system?"

Adam followed the rules the same as everyone else. The supply of vaccines is limited and scarce. If X and Y are both people eligible to receive the vaccine, X really should not be getting upset with Y if Y was able to get an appointment and X is still waiting. It's not Adam's fault similarly eligible people are still waiting.

That is going to be the case throughout this process until supply exceeds demand. It sucks but there's not much anyone can do about that fact; even if we threw infinite resources into vaccine production and distribution, we are not going to wake up the next day and magically 600 million vaccine doses were produced and shipped out in 1 night.