3 ms·
that isn't a reason to be complacent about furthering governmental/corporate surveillance capabilities. in fact, it should remind us to take away those prior s
by clairity 7y ago
that isn't a reason to be complacent about furthering governmental/corporate surveillance capabilities.
in fact, it should remind us to take away those prior surveillance capabilities, and demand any contact tracing system to give control to users and be fully off-limits to large power structures (e.g., only shared between users and researchers).
and being hard to do so is no excuse. we have millions of people we can work on the problem if it's so important to warrant such massive effort.
- tastroder 7y agoPeople are working on contact tracing, this takes care of one of the harder parts without dictating central control in a pretty sensible manner. Being wary of privacy adverse interests in this context is good but in this context makes little sense. This specification only touches the question of data leaving the device in ways that restrict what the outside party, in an RFC manner MUST wording, can do with the data. It's pretty clear that we will get contact tracing applications in many parts of the world, regardless of any action Apple or Google might have taken. Might as well base it on something that does not compromise the user base wholesale.