About hard cutoff, do we really know that is how it will work?
Hard-cutoff estimations of exponential growth is in very common use in Electrical Engineering. The math is the same, I don't see any reason why not. Think about it graphically, if it helps.
We only pretended to have some form of control in some places a few months back, other than that, this thing has been going its merry way.
Given the "Hard Cutoff" estimation, we're either on the left-side of the hard cutoff, or the right side. Either everything matters (because we've reached the left-side), or nothing mattered (because we've reached the right side).
That is why the first lockdowns took too long to start, we could have seen it coming for months.
The hard-cutoff estimate more or less proves the policy issue at play here.
Masks, Lockdowns, Vaccines... it doesn't "matter" how you get to the left. If you're on the left-side of the hard cutoff, you are winning vs the virus, and no further action is necessary. All policies that "further push you left" don't help, because you're already behind the hard cutoff and the virus is in remission.
If you're on the right-side of the cutoff, it doesn't matter how many lockdowns, masks, or vaccines you deploy. It feels like nothing is working... until you suddenly shift over to the left side and "something worked". It doesn't matter how hard you work, because as long as you're on the right side, infections, deaths, and hospitalizations continue to rise exponentially.
EDIT: Here's another paint image I whipped up to explain the economics.
Sure, we can measure exponential things and then understand how they work, but in our basic thought we really don't - other things take precedence that we feel are more pressing at each moment, until we reach a point where we cannot deny there is a problem that needs fixing.
That's where "Hard Cutoff" becomes a better description. Humans understand "Hard Cutoffs" since its an every-day occurance.
If you wanted to break the world record 100m sprint time, what do you have to run? 9.57s will be a new world record. 9.59 doesn't matter, you were slower than Bolt from 2012 Olympics. A 9.59 second run is the same as a 20-second run. We've got a hard-cutoff before you get entered into the record books.
From the perspective of "set a new record", we have a hard cutoff. "Nothing matters" if you're above the cutoff, and no one really cares how much you beat the old record by. Even winning by 0.01 seconds would be enough.
Its a bit of a "lie" because hard-cutoffs aren't reality. The "reality" is exponential growth. But... yeah. I can see where some people haven't practiced their logarithms and may need a different, simpler model to understand things.