3 ms·

Well good news: This system does not assign an identifier to everyone, so it works.

by DagAgren 7y ago

sasasassy 7y ago
Private until someone flags someone or everyone as infected.
- DagAgren 7y ago
  That is not a possible.
syshum 7y ago
It absolutely does, and broadcasts it via BlueTooth, then other phones track which ID's you have been near. The idea that can not be used for something other than COVID is moronic, this type of system has been done in Marketing for a long time, Google knows this very well. This is not a new or novel idea, nor it is private
- DagAgren 7y ago
  It does not transmit "an ID". It transmits random IDs, that cycle often.
  - syshum 7y ago
    Except for people that Test Positive, which then it uploads each of the Daily Tracing keys to a central server for each of the day you were positive, this is reversible, and has to be in order to identify all of the contacts the person came in contact with you can not have an anonymous system that also provides aways to trace back to individuals you came in contact with it is impossible and their complex Hash of hashes is just a way to make it seems private for people that do not understand what is really going on, it sounds good on the surface, but that is all it is surface level that is with out getting into the ways to compromise the device to get the original Tracking key that all of the other tracking keys are generated from
    - DagAgren 7y ago
      Yes, that is the tradeoff you are making to keep actual human beings from dying painfully. You can afford to give up a few days of your privacy for that. Really, you can.
      - syshum 7y ago
        Really you are going to come back at me with a Privacy vs Safety fallacy. If that is all the justification you have, you have already lost the debate. That kind of justification can be used for all manner of dystopian programs. Authoritarians have been limiting privacy and freedom for centuries on the basis of safety. Right now in congress the EARNIT act is attempting to use that very argument for the "safety of children" we all need to give up E2E encryption No I completely reject your premise that because of safety I need to give up my privacy
        DagAgren 7y ago
        No, there is no fallacy. There really isn't. You privacy is NOT more important than a human life, which is exactly what is at stake here. Claiming otherwise is utterly sociopathic.
        syshum 7y ago
        No it means I would rather die with privacy and liberty than to live in an Authoritarian Dystopia with no liberty or privacy it is not sociopathic to put an extremely high value on privacy and liberty
        DagAgren 7y ago
        No, it does not mean that. It means you would rather let OTHER people die with your privacy. You are literally valuing your privacy higher than the life of other people. And yes, that is sociopathic.
        7y ago

Well good news: This system does not assign an identifier to everyone, so it works.

sasasassy 7y ago

Private until someone flags someone or everyone as infected.

DagAgren 7y ago
That is not a possible.

syshum 7y ago

It absolutely does, and broadcasts it via BlueTooth, then other phones track which ID's you have been near. The idea that can not be used for something other than COVID is moronic, this type of system has been done in Marketing for a long time, Google knows this very well. This is not a new or novel idea, nor it is private

DagAgren 7y ago
It does not transmit "an ID". It transmits random IDs, that cycle often.
- syshum 7y ago
  Except for people that Test Positive, which then it uploads each of the Daily Tracing keys to a central server for each of the day you were positive, this is reversible, and has to be in order to identify all of the contacts the person came in contact with you can not have an anonymous system that also provides aways to trace back to individuals you came in contact with it is impossible and their complex Hash of hashes is just a way to make it seems private for people that do not understand what is really going on, it sounds good on the surface, but that is all it is surface level that is with out getting into the ways to compromise the device to get the original Tracking key that all of the other tracking keys are generated from
  - DagAgren 7y ago
    Yes, that is the tradeoff you are making to keep actual human beings from dying painfully. You can afford to give up a few days of your privacy for that. Really, you can.
    - syshum 7y ago
      Really you are going to come back at me with a Privacy vs Safety fallacy. If that is all the justification you have, you have already lost the debate. That kind of justification can be used for all manner of dystopian programs. Authoritarians have been limiting privacy and freedom for centuries on the basis of safety. Right now in congress the EARNIT act is attempting to use that very argument for the "safety of children" we all need to give up E2E encryption No I completely reject your premise that because of safety I need to give up my privacy
      - DagAgren 7y ago
        No, there is no fallacy. There really isn't. You privacy is NOT more important than a human life, which is exactly what is at stake here. Claiming otherwise is utterly sociopathic.
        syshum 7y ago
        No it means I would rather die with privacy and liberty than to live in an Authoritarian Dystopia with no liberty or privacy it is not sociopathic to put an extremely high value on privacy and liberty
        DagAgren 7y ago
        No, it does not mean that. It means you would rather let OTHER people die with your privacy. You are literally valuing your privacy higher than the life of other people. And yes, that is sociopathic.
        7y ago