That’s the one. #97 with Hotez goes a little further into some of the background science, but the more recent ones obviously update with newer data.
I don’t think I would express my thoughts as optimism, however I found the detailed discussions on the different assumptions that go into the projections to be far more transparent than other sources. I also think it offers less hyperbole and emotion than other sources, which lends itself to more reasoning. They’re concerned but pragmatic and try actually explaining concepts instead of dumbing it down. I think that’s what I find reassuring if you want to call it that.
Edit: recently he did a short post on social media where he talked about thinking of each area of the US as a locality instead of the US as a whole (which you can apply to Italy too: northern part far worse than Sicily for instance). I think with that framework when you look at a lot of the stay-at-home measures being taken in places it has the potential to start flattening if you will.
NYC is in a bad spot due to pop density and had a “head start” in cases on Ohio on the same day they shut their schools (both shut schools same day, but Ohio was not as far along in number of cases), but since then Ohio has a slightly shallower growth rate curve though early to call it optimistic. So to me, some of the measures seem to be starting to finally sink in.
Though we are sorely lacking on testing. We need to have enough test ability to be able to test a random sample of asymptomatic people to get an actual accurate assessment. Clearly not there.