4 ms·

Contract tracing is a disaster. I’ve secured a forensic RF shielding bag for my phone. I refuse to participate

jariel 7y ago
That's fine, then stay at home. You're a liability to the rest of us. It's fair if you don't want to use it, but then you cannot go anywhere near any other person, because you're putting everyone at risk.
- throwaway122378 7y ago
  That’s a little extreme- if someone doesn’t want to be tracked they must stay at home and shamed? There are other alternatives.
  - jariel 7y ago
    So what are the alternatives exactly? Because we have the whole world on lockdown waiting for someone to tell us. Unfortunately, without a vaccine or cure - there are only 2 approaches that work: 1) Eradication - like Taiwan. They have a tiny number of cases in full quarantine. Nobody comes on or off the island without being checked. So they are in total isolation. But we can't do this. 2) Contact tracing - like Korea. They keep the virus under wraps by aggressively isolating cases, using social policy centered around contact tracing. Of course, they have masks, widespread testing, but a very asserted focus on contact management. FYI we have to get it down to low-levels before this policy can be implemented. But it works. Regular 'social distancing' does not do enough. Right now - we are coming out of our 'lockdowns' but the virus will likely just bounce back - why would it not? Other than the fact weather does play a role and it's getting warmer, there's no reason for the COVID growth to come back to where it was. So either you stay away from other people - or - at least you consent to inform them if somehow you were near them, which requires contact tracing obviously with the addition of good operational capabilities there, it's not 'just an app'.
    - throwaway122378 7y ago
      The longer the country is shut down the more lives we’ll lose to poverty related deaths. Total covid deaths are still below last seasons Flu death total and that’s Counting all the probable covid deaths that are included in this years count. That was with the population operating under pre covid lifestyle. We can get back now and take caution. Shelter those above 65 and anyone with an underlying condition. (Of course anyone should stay home if they feel the need) Everyone else back to life with social distancing and preventative measures in place (masks, no concerts etc) Build immunity and slowly bring the rest of society back. Sources: Go research. Look at the data we are way over doing it. Anything I post will be taken with a grain of salt anyway.
      - ToFundorNot 7y ago
        I did. We're two days away from matching the top end estimates for 2019 flu deaths[1] And that's with an estimated ~1/30th of the infections. Based off the most liberal estimates of deaths directly related to the financial crisis, we're many multiples higher (est: 10,000+)[2] and a couple of day from being par with both direct, and indirect deaths related to stress and financial strife (assuming all the cancer patience died, which they did not) [3]. We're moving towards what you're suggesting, now that most countries have a serious testing infrastructure in place. Randomized testing, plus regular testing of the medial professionals tied with social distancing is what our near future hold. Most things open up to a limited extent, and we'll move from there. [1] https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-disease-2019-vs-the-flu https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseas... [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/health-27796628 https://www.bbc.com/news/health-27796628 [3] https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/economic-downturn-excess-cancer-deaths-atun/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/economic-do...
        dannyw 7y ago
        Actually, not exactly. The antibody tests, everywhere from NYC to California to Germany to Italy, is showing that unreported infections may be 80x as high as reported infections. In fact, entire homeless shelters have been tested with about a third being infected, and zero showing symptoms. What this means is that COVID19 is significantly less dangerous than we originally thought. 1 in 5 NYCers have antibodies; and this was sampled a week ago. Given how fast COVID spreads, it could be 1 in 4 now. This means that if we flatten the curve enough, we could possibly see ~3x the deaths (to reach a 80% infected rate) and reach herd immunity. Now, no one likes thinking about this, but is another 32K deaths worth fully re-opening NYC and getting rid of social distancing? I think it is arguable to say yes, just as it is arguable to say no. We absolutely cannot be in lockdown till a vaccine is found, we cannot stay at home for 18 months or we will witness decades of economic devastation for 7.5 billion people on the planet (given how connected the world is); not to mention all the mental health harm; as well as physical health harm (deferral of non-essential but still highly important surgeries like hip replacements; less preventative check ups from people going to doctors; etc). There are trade-offs to be made: we have cars despite the fact that they kill. We allow cigarettes despite the fact that they kill. We allow alcohol despite the fact that they kill. For anyone who this message resonates to, please join us on /r/LockdownSkepticism. We're about using logic and data discuss what the best course of action is for society as a whole.
- Avamander 7y ago
  By going out you're already putting people at risk, tracker or no tracker attached. You and people like you, thinking this is a perfect solution, are actually a bigger liability to public health.
  - jariel 7y ago
    "By going out you're already putting people at risk, tracker or no tracker attached" This is completely false because, with contact tracing, we can probabilistically determine who has likely to have had contact and therefore be infected, which is a proven technique for the suppression of COVID. Korea has implemented this solution, it works, and their economy is open. By venturing outside without contact-tracing - we know the results: Italy, Spain etc.. Just the opposite ... it's the 'privacy fanatics' who are having difficulty grasping a situation that hits at their preconceived sensitivities. 'Just go outside' will kill is quickly. 'Shelter in place' will kill us slowly. 'Contact tracing policy - (followup, quarantine for those affected) means we can go about our business roughly as normal with only the slight inconvenience of having an 'app' on our phones and possibly wearing masks. I'm sorry but it's the anti-contact tracing people that are the tip of the anti-science community right now. Anti contact tracing people are the new 'anti-vaxxers'.
    - Avamander 7y ago
      > suppression of COVID. Exactly suppression, not prevention. If you're immunocompromised, old or in a risk group, which most americans are, you're s* out of luck, even with the app, you can't really go outside. People thinking contact tracing is the silver bullet are just delusional or outright dangerous. Especially if those people also think contact tracing can't be done privacy-friendly.
      - jariel 7y ago
        "People thinking contact tracing is the silver bullet are just delusional or outright dangerous." Your ad-hominems are inappropriate, especially since you are misreading the point and inventing your own interpretation. Nobody is indicating that 'contact tracing' is a 'silver bullet' and nobody is indicating that 'people won't' die - obviously, dangers exist. However, here are the results of the 'contact tracing' policy here: [1] are extremely effective. There are less than 250 deaths in South Korea a population of 24 Million - and they do not have 'shelter in place' orders. This is very clear scientific evidence of an outstandingly effective solution against COVID, by far the best approach for those nations that cannot hope to eradicate it / keep it out like Taiwan. America has 10's of thousands dead and an economy that is hurling towards death with millions unemployed, trillions in bailouts, the worst existential calamity since WW2, and everyone is locked in their homes. The Koreans have very effectively dealt with the problem, kept harm way down their economy is mostly functional. Privacy is obviously a concern but it's nowhere near the threshold for contemplating existential collapse. Given the choice between 'stay at home' and 'contact tracing' - over 99% of people would choose 'contact tracing'. [1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/south-korea/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/south-kore...
- dang 7y ago
  It's not ok to cross into personal attack in HN comments, so please don't. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

That's fine, then stay at home. You're a liability to the rest of us. It's fair if you don't want to use it, but then you cannot go anywhere near any other person, because you're putting everyone at risk.

throwaway122378 7y ago
That’s a little extreme- if someone doesn’t want to be tracked they must stay at home and shamed? There are other alternatives.
- jariel 7y ago
  So what are the alternatives exactly? Because we have the whole world on lockdown waiting for someone to tell us. Unfortunately, without a vaccine or cure - there are only 2 approaches that work: 1) Eradication - like Taiwan. They have a tiny number of cases in full quarantine. Nobody comes on or off the island without being checked. So they are in total isolation. But we can't do this. 2) Contact tracing - like Korea. They keep the virus under wraps by aggressively isolating cases, using social policy centered around contact tracing. Of course, they have masks, widespread testing, but a very asserted focus on contact management. FYI we have to get it down to low-levels before this policy can be implemented. But it works. Regular 'social distancing' does not do enough. Right now - we are coming out of our 'lockdowns' but the virus will likely just bounce back - why would it not? Other than the fact weather does play a role and it's getting warmer, there's no reason for the COVID growth to come back to where it was. So either you stay away from other people - or - at least you consent to inform them if somehow you were near them, which requires contact tracing obviously with the addition of good operational capabilities there, it's not 'just an app'.
  - throwaway122378 7y ago
    The longer the country is shut down the more lives we’ll lose to poverty related deaths. Total covid deaths are still below last seasons Flu death total and that’s Counting all the probable covid deaths that are included in this years count. That was with the population operating under pre covid lifestyle. We can get back now and take caution. Shelter those above 65 and anyone with an underlying condition. (Of course anyone should stay home if they feel the need) Everyone else back to life with social distancing and preventative measures in place (masks, no concerts etc) Build immunity and slowly bring the rest of society back. Sources: Go research. Look at the data we are way over doing it. Anything I post will be taken with a grain of salt anyway.
    - ToFundorNot 7y ago
      I did. We're two days away from matching the top end estimates for 2019 flu deaths[1] And that's with an estimated ~1/30th of the infections. Based off the most liberal estimates of deaths directly related to the financial crisis, we're many multiples higher (est: 10,000+)[2] and a couple of day from being par with both direct, and indirect deaths related to stress and financial strife (assuming all the cancer patience died, which they did not) [3]. We're moving towards what you're suggesting, now that most countries have a serious testing infrastructure in place. Randomized testing, plus regular testing of the medial professionals tied with social distancing is what our near future hold. Most things open up to a limited extent, and we'll move from there. [1] https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/coronavirus-disease-2019-vs-the-flu https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseas... [2] https://www.bbc.com/news/health-27796628 https://www.bbc.com/news/health-27796628 [3] https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/economic-downturn-excess-cancer-deaths-atun/ https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/press-releases/economic-do...
      - dannyw 7y ago
        Actually, not exactly. The antibody tests, everywhere from NYC to California to Germany to Italy, is showing that unreported infections may be 80x as high as reported infections. In fact, entire homeless shelters have been tested with about a third being infected, and zero showing symptoms. What this means is that COVID19 is significantly less dangerous than we originally thought. 1 in 5 NYCers have antibodies; and this was sampled a week ago. Given how fast COVID spreads, it could be 1 in 4 now. This means that if we flatten the curve enough, we could possibly see ~3x the deaths (to reach a 80% infected rate) and reach herd immunity. Now, no one likes thinking about this, but is another 32K deaths worth fully re-opening NYC and getting rid of social distancing? I think it is arguable to say yes, just as it is arguable to say no. We absolutely cannot be in lockdown till a vaccine is found, we cannot stay at home for 18 months or we will witness decades of economic devastation for 7.5 billion people on the planet (given how connected the world is); not to mention all the mental health harm; as well as physical health harm (deferral of non-essential but still highly important surgeries like hip replacements; less preventative check ups from people going to doctors; etc). There are trade-offs to be made: we have cars despite the fact that they kill. We allow cigarettes despite the fact that they kill. We allow alcohol despite the fact that they kill. For anyone who this message resonates to, please join us on /r/LockdownSkepticism. We're about using logic and data discuss what the best course of action is for society as a whole.
Avamander 7y ago
By going out you're already putting people at risk, tracker or no tracker attached. You and people like you, thinking this is a perfect solution, are actually a bigger liability to public health.
- jariel 7y ago
  "By going out you're already putting people at risk, tracker or no tracker attached" This is completely false because, with contact tracing, we can probabilistically determine who has likely to have had contact and therefore be infected, which is a proven technique for the suppression of COVID. Korea has implemented this solution, it works, and their economy is open. By venturing outside without contact-tracing - we know the results: Italy, Spain etc.. Just the opposite ... it's the 'privacy fanatics' who are having difficulty grasping a situation that hits at their preconceived sensitivities. 'Just go outside' will kill is quickly. 'Shelter in place' will kill us slowly. 'Contact tracing policy - (followup, quarantine for those affected) means we can go about our business roughly as normal with only the slight inconvenience of having an 'app' on our phones and possibly wearing masks. I'm sorry but it's the anti-contact tracing people that are the tip of the anti-science community right now. Anti contact tracing people are the new 'anti-vaxxers'.
  - Avamander 7y ago
    > suppression of COVID. Exactly suppression, not prevention. If you're immunocompromised, old or in a risk group, which most americans are, you're s* out of luck, even with the app, you can't really go outside. People thinking contact tracing is the silver bullet are just delusional or outright dangerous. Especially if those people also think contact tracing can't be done privacy-friendly.
    - jariel 7y ago
      "People thinking contact tracing is the silver bullet are just delusional or outright dangerous." Your ad-hominems are inappropriate, especially since you are misreading the point and inventing your own interpretation. Nobody is indicating that 'contact tracing' is a 'silver bullet' and nobody is indicating that 'people won't' die - obviously, dangers exist. However, here are the results of the 'contact tracing' policy here: [1] are extremely effective. There are less than 250 deaths in South Korea a population of 24 Million - and they do not have 'shelter in place' orders. This is very clear scientific evidence of an outstandingly effective solution against COVID, by far the best approach for those nations that cannot hope to eradicate it / keep it out like Taiwan. America has 10's of thousands dead and an economy that is hurling towards death with millions unemployed, trillions in bailouts, the worst existential calamity since WW2, and everyone is locked in their homes. The Koreans have very effectively dealt with the problem, kept harm way down their economy is mostly functional. Privacy is obviously a concern but it's nowhere near the threshold for contemplating existential collapse. Given the choice between 'stay at home' and 'contact tracing' - over 99% of people would choose 'contact tracing'. [1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/south-korea/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/south-kore...
dang 7y ago
It's not ok to cross into personal attack in HN comments, so please don't. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html