14 ms·

You seem to be referring to the South Australia Home Quarantine app [1]. There has been a lot of misinformation circulating about this app recently. I'd just li

You seem to be referring to the South Australia Home Quarantine app [1]. There has been a lot of misinformation circulating about this app recently. I'd just like to clear up some things: The app only applies to people that need to quarantine, not the general population. The app allows people who are required to isolate to opt to do their isolation at home, rather than stay at a quarantine facility. Nobody is being forced to use the app. It is a way for authorities to make sure people are quarantining correctly, and to follow up cases of contact if people break their isolation bubble. Police are not arresting people for failing to check in. (My guess is that they would reset your isolation duration, follow up contacts and/or move you into a managed quarantine). [1] https://www.covid-19.sa.gov.au/home-quarantine-app https://www.covid-19.sa.gov.au/home-quarantine-app

Palmik 5y ago
Even if it's "just" for 2 weeks of quarantine, being able to check-in within 15 minutes seems unreasonable. What about taking a nap, taking a bath, cooking, etc.? Many other countries trust their citizens enough that such draconian measures weren't required even at the height of the pandemic. Not to mention now. I'd be curious how violations to check-in are handled in practice.
- Nursie 5y ago
  > What about taking a nap, taking a bath, cooking, etc.? If you fail to check in, they try again a bit later on, if you fail again it falls back to the non app-enabled method of a police check at your home. The app is voluntary and allows you to be at home rather than in a facility, and to not have random police checks. It's a convenience, not an imposition. > Many other countries trust their citizens enough that such draconian measures weren't required even at the height of the pandemic. In some like the UK, that trust was misplaced, and compliance with isolation rules was under 50%. > I'd be curious how violations to check-in are handled in practice. By a second request and then a police visit, the same police visit you'd get if you opted not to use the app at all.
  - iotku 5y ago
    >The app is voluntary and allows you to be at home rather than in a facility, and to not have random police checks If the alternative is being harassed by the police it's not voluntary.
    - Nursie 5y ago
      The app is entirely voluntary. Quarantine is not. Effectively you get to choose - 1. Stay in a quarantine centre for two weeks under guard (which you pay for) 2. Quarantine at home with police visits 3. As above but check in with the app In that context, getting pissed off about the app is ridiculous. You want to argue quarantine is unnecessary or wrong? Go for it, make those arguments. But what you’re doing is pissing and moaning about the easiest and least intrusive option. It’s not a good look. As someone who is coming to the end of two weeks in a quarantine centre (actually a Novotel, and there’s no app or home quarantine for international arrivals), that app option looks mighty good. And as I am about to enter a state with no coronavirus, quarantine is looking like it’s been a great plan.
      - tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
        > 2. Quarantine at home with police visits Is this an official option, or do you have to install the app then turn your phone off, with the potential of this turning to 1 if they don't like you doing that too often?
        Nursie 5y ago
        I believe this is an official option, at least in WA where there is already an app, it's up to you which option to take. AFAICT there is no "we're sick of visiting you, off to a quarantine centre" potential at all, effectively you're doing them a favour by using the app, the default would be police visits. Unless you're found to have breached quarantine the conditions I guess. Not sure what happens then.
    - ikr678 5y ago
      This is in one of the few jurisdictions worldwide with zero covid trasmission, and the government wishes to keep it that way.
jeremyvisser 5y ago
> The app allows people who are required to isolate to opt to do their isolation at home, rather than stay at a quarantine facility. > Nobody is being forced to use the app. If there’s a cost difference, I’d say that “forced” is an unfairly neutral word to use. SA is charging upwards of $3000 (for 1 adult, plus $1000 each additional adult, plus $500 per child) for hotel quarantine [1], and though I can’t find a definitive source, your link does say it is intended to be a “cost effective alternative to medi-hotel quarantine”. So for a family of 2 adults, 2 kids, being charged $5000 to avoid using the app isn’t real freedom. If it means the difference between putting food on the table or not, it’s no choice at all. [1] https://www.covid-19.sa.gov.au/restrictions-and-responsibilities/international-arrivals https://www.covid-19.sa.gov.au/restrictions-and-responsibili...
- soco 5y ago
  My guess is you didn't read there are three options. In most countries of the world (including mine) you get only two options, yet in Australia three. Two of them being free of cost: at home with human checks, or at home with app checks. Please take down your costs strawman, it's not helping the debate.
  - noptd 5y ago
    Considering the choice is still essentially pay a sizeable sum of money or be physically monitored, I'd say the parent's point still stands.
sandworm101 5y ago
>> rather than stay at a quarantine facility. Nobody is being forced to use the app. Download the app or we send you to a camp? That isn't much of a choice. I'd say it is about as non-choice as possible while still meeting the literal definition.
- Nursie 5y ago
  I'll say what I said on the other thread - If you want to present an argument against quarantine being needed or warranted, please go ahead. Checking in on the app is the least intrusive of the three options - quarantine under guard (usually in a hotel, like the one I'm in right now), quarantine at home with police visits tio ensure compliance, or quarantine at home checking in to the app once or twice a day. In this context, getting hysterical about the least intrusive option is weird.
  - chitowneats 5y ago
    How did Australians become like this? In my imagination, my American ancestors were quite similar to yours. And yet...
    - Nursie 5y ago
      Become like what? Do you have an argument against quarantine? Would tens of thousands of deaths been better than asking travellers to check in for a couple of weeks on arrival, during a pandemic? I’m really not sure what point you’re trying to make. I'm British by the way. The UK also has guarded quarantine centres in hotels for people coming in from what it considers “red zones”
      - chitowneats 5y ago
        Quarantine for what? That's what you do with sick people. Whatever is going on in Australia has long ago left the realm of sane quarantine procedure. It will be 2022 soon, and the Australians are trying to prevent interstate spread of COVID-19. It's madness. Responding to your edit: still madness
charbonneau 5y ago
> quarantine facility > managed quarantine Love it.
- christophilus 5y ago
  It’s quarantine as a service. The Stripe of quarantine, if you will.
  - charbonneau 5y ago
    Looking forward to the annual QaaStr conference!
bamboozled 5y ago
I still don't agree this should be the way people are treated for having a virus. It's over the top. No where else in the world is cracking down like this (AFAIK, maybe China?) This is totally abusing a crisis to gain handover people and using "safety" as justification.
- samsin 5y ago
  It's not people quarantining because they have the virus, it's related to the mandatory quarantine for international arrivals. Previously you needed to complete 2-weeks of hotel quarantine when you arrived in Australia. This new compromise allows people an option to complete that quarantine period from their own home instead. It's part of a move to increase overseas arrivals while minimising transmission.
  - luxuryballs 5y ago
    funny, if it’s not even for having a virus then what’s the point? I can’t help but think this is just the next step in evolution of the surveillance state using the existence of cold viruses as an excuse, it is not going to go well for the quality of care if the state becomes this embedded in the healthcare system, this is one of those times when a slippery slope is a very valid argument, if they start pushing unvaccinated people out of society bit by bit all based on data and science that is blessed by the state then this becomes a way of eliminating people who mistrust the government from society by force, it’s all well and good until the system is in place and the even more wrong people become in charge and suddenly at the helm of it
  - bamboozled 5y ago
    Why doesn't the Government take some responsibility though? They screwed up on some many levels, now it's up to the individual to be tracked like a criminal? That's why this is such a joke. I remember reading the Prime Minister of Australia scoffed at corona virus, said it was a Chinese problem and said he will attend the Rugby League.
luxuryballs 5y ago
“people that need to quarantine” also happens to be based on something only a tiny fraction of people have the means to verify, I can’t think of anything in modern times more prone to tyranny than invisible requirements only the chosen state mages can bless
roody15 5y ago
“ The app allows people who are required to isolate to opt to do their isolation at home, rather than stay at a quarantine facility.” Sounds just like this was taken from a dystopian novel.
- throwanem 5y ago
  So does a global pandemic that's killed millions worldwide.
  - ls612 5y ago
    Nah that was just taken from the history books. It was our totalitarian response that was from the dystopian novel.
    - AndrewBissell 5y ago
      The historical ignorance around Covid and other pandemics, and the way people act as though it was some unprecedented event that justifies the unprecedented reaction, is really stunning.
      - throwanem 5y ago
        One might perhaps imagine that those concerned with the lessons of history would not overlook the lack of precedent for a pandemic taking place in a time of ubiquitous and nigh instantaneous global travel. Such a one would be disappointed in this case, certainly, but the expectation could be considered reasonable nonetheless.
        AndrewBissell 5y ago
        No, this doesn't actually make the definitive difference you think it does. Many earlier pandemics had no problem spreading throughout the almost entire world in relatively short order.
      - isaacremuant 5y ago
satronaut 5y ago
what prohibits them from quarantining at home in the first place? Is there a difference between not leaving my room for 2 weeks (except to use the bathroom) and staying in a hotel for 2 weeks?
bluefirebrand 5y ago
> The app allows people who are required to isolate to opt to do their isolation at home, rather than stay at a quarantine facility. Nobody is being forced to use the app Weird. In Canada we're allowed to isolate at home without a wildly intrusive app, or police visits or anything like that. We get a fine if we are caught out when we are required to isolate, that's all. Personally if my government was proposing this kind of quarantine tracking, I'd be looking to move somewhere sane.
- chopin 5y ago
  Bad thing that there's almost nowhere to move. Almost everybody has their intrusive model to cope with Covid.
all2 5y ago
> managed quarantine What's that?
gorwell 5y ago
"Our oppressor isn't as bad as you've heard. They give us choices! For example, we get to choose chicken or beef for our 12pm meal." Be careful. Stockholm syndrome is real.
TrevorJ 5y ago
> The app allows people who are required to isolate to opt to do their isolation at home, rather than stay at a quarantine facility. Nobody is being forced to use the app. Oh, well I guess it's ok then. /s
908B64B197 5y ago
> The app allows people who are required to isolate to opt to do their isolation at home, rather than stay at a quarantine facility. Nobody is being forced to use the app. Wait. So if I refuse to be tracked by the government, the government will take me by force to a detention camp? Did someone accidently ran a search and replace for Cuba and Australia before publishing the article?
pathseeker 5y ago
>My guess is that they would reset your isolation duration You do know that quarantine isn't supposed to be a punishment, right? Resetting your isolation duration is punitive and has zero relationship to your ability to spread covid.

Palmik 5y ago

Even if it's "just" for 2 weeks of quarantine, being able to check-in within 15 minutes seems unreasonable. What about taking a nap, taking a bath, cooking, etc.? Many other countries trust their citizens enough that such draconian measures weren't required even at the height of the pandemic. Not to mention now. I'd be curious how violations to check-in are handled in practice.

Nursie 5y ago
> What about taking a nap, taking a bath, cooking, etc.? If you fail to check in, they try again a bit later on, if you fail again it falls back to the non app-enabled method of a police check at your home. The app is voluntary and allows you to be at home rather than in a facility, and to not have random police checks. It's a convenience, not an imposition. > Many other countries trust their citizens enough that such draconian measures weren't required even at the height of the pandemic. In some like the UK, that trust was misplaced, and compliance with isolation rules was under 50%. > I'd be curious how violations to check-in are handled in practice. By a second request and then a police visit, the same police visit you'd get if you opted not to use the app at all.
- iotku 5y ago
  >The app is voluntary and allows you to be at home rather than in a facility, and to not have random police checks If the alternative is being harassed by the police it's not voluntary.
  - Nursie 5y ago
    The app is entirely voluntary. Quarantine is not. Effectively you get to choose - 1. Stay in a quarantine centre for two weeks under guard (which you pay for) 2. Quarantine at home with police visits 3. As above but check in with the app In that context, getting pissed off about the app is ridiculous. You want to argue quarantine is unnecessary or wrong? Go for it, make those arguments. But what you’re doing is pissing and moaning about the easiest and least intrusive option. It’s not a good look. As someone who is coming to the end of two weeks in a quarantine centre (actually a Novotel, and there’s no app or home quarantine for international arrivals), that app option looks mighty good. And as I am about to enter a state with no coronavirus, quarantine is looking like it’s been a great plan.
    - tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
      > 2. Quarantine at home with police visits Is this an official option, or do you have to install the app then turn your phone off, with the potential of this turning to 1 if they don't like you doing that too often?
      - Nursie 5y ago
        I believe this is an official option, at least in WA where there is already an app, it's up to you which option to take. AFAICT there is no "we're sick of visiting you, off to a quarantine centre" potential at all, effectively you're doing them a favour by using the app, the default would be police visits. Unless you're found to have breached quarantine the conditions I guess. Not sure what happens then.
  - ikr678 5y ago
    This is in one of the few jurisdictions worldwide with zero covid trasmission, and the government wishes to keep it that way.

jeremyvisser 5y ago

> The app allows people who are required to isolate to opt to do their isolation at home, rather than stay at a quarantine facility. > Nobody is being forced to use the app. If there’s a cost difference, I’d say that “forced” is an unfairly neutral word to use. SA is charging upwards of $3000 (for 1 adult, plus $1000 each additional adult, plus $500 per child) for hotel quarantine [1], and though I can’t find a definitive source, your link does say it is intended to be a “cost effective alternative to medi-hotel quarantine”. So for a family of 2 adults, 2 kids, being charged $5000 to avoid using the app isn’t real freedom. If it means the difference between putting food on the table or not, it’s no choice at all. [1] https://www.covid-19.sa.gov.au/restrictions-and-responsibilities/international-arrivals https://www.covid-19.sa.gov.au/restrictions-and-responsibili...

soco 5y ago
My guess is you didn't read there are three options. In most countries of the world (including mine) you get only two options, yet in Australia three. Two of them being free of cost: at home with human checks, or at home with app checks. Please take down your costs strawman, it's not helping the debate.
- noptd 5y ago
  Considering the choice is still essentially pay a sizeable sum of money or be physically monitored, I'd say the parent's point still stands.

sandworm101 5y ago

>> rather than stay at a quarantine facility. Nobody is being forced to use the app. Download the app or we send you to a camp? That isn't much of a choice. I'd say it is about as non-choice as possible while still meeting the literal definition.

Nursie 5y ago
I'll say what I said on the other thread - If you want to present an argument against quarantine being needed or warranted, please go ahead. Checking in on the app is the least intrusive of the three options - quarantine under guard (usually in a hotel, like the one I'm in right now), quarantine at home with police visits tio ensure compliance, or quarantine at home checking in to the app once or twice a day. In this context, getting hysterical about the least intrusive option is weird.
- chitowneats 5y ago
  How did Australians become like this? In my imagination, my American ancestors were quite similar to yours. And yet...
  - Nursie 5y ago
    Become like what? Do you have an argument against quarantine? Would tens of thousands of deaths been better than asking travellers to check in for a couple of weeks on arrival, during a pandemic? I’m really not sure what point you’re trying to make. I'm British by the way. The UK also has guarded quarantine centres in hotels for people coming in from what it considers “red zones”
    - chitowneats 5y ago
      Quarantine for what? That's what you do with sick people. Whatever is going on in Australia has long ago left the realm of sane quarantine procedure. It will be 2022 soon, and the Australians are trying to prevent interstate spread of COVID-19. It's madness. Responding to your edit: still madness

charbonneau 5y ago

> quarantine facility > managed quarantine Love it.

christophilus 5y ago
It’s quarantine as a service. The Stripe of quarantine, if you will.
- charbonneau 5y ago
  Looking forward to the annual QaaStr conference!

bamboozled 5y ago

I still don't agree this should be the way people are treated for having a virus. It's over the top. No where else in the world is cracking down like this (AFAIK, maybe China?) This is totally abusing a crisis to gain handover people and using "safety" as justification.

samsin 5y ago
It's not people quarantining because they have the virus, it's related to the mandatory quarantine for international arrivals. Previously you needed to complete 2-weeks of hotel quarantine when you arrived in Australia. This new compromise allows people an option to complete that quarantine period from their own home instead. It's part of a move to increase overseas arrivals while minimising transmission.
- luxuryballs 5y ago
  funny, if it’s not even for having a virus then what’s the point? I can’t help but think this is just the next step in evolution of the surveillance state using the existence of cold viruses as an excuse, it is not going to go well for the quality of care if the state becomes this embedded in the healthcare system, this is one of those times when a slippery slope is a very valid argument, if they start pushing unvaccinated people out of society bit by bit all based on data and science that is blessed by the state then this becomes a way of eliminating people who mistrust the government from society by force, it’s all well and good until the system is in place and the even more wrong people become in charge and suddenly at the helm of it
- bamboozled 5y ago
  Why doesn't the Government take some responsibility though? They screwed up on some many levels, now it's up to the individual to be tracked like a criminal? That's why this is such a joke. I remember reading the Prime Minister of Australia scoffed at corona virus, said it was a Chinese problem and said he will attend the Rugby League.

luxuryballs 5y ago

“people that need to quarantine” also happens to be based on something only a tiny fraction of people have the means to verify, I can’t think of anything in modern times more prone to tyranny than invisible requirements only the chosen state mages can bless

roody15 5y ago

“ The app allows people who are required to isolate to opt to do their isolation at home, rather than stay at a quarantine facility.” Sounds just like this was taken from a dystopian novel.

throwanem 5y ago
So does a global pandemic that's killed millions worldwide.
- ls612 5y ago
  Nah that was just taken from the history books. It was our totalitarian response that was from the dystopian novel.
  - AndrewBissell 5y ago
    The historical ignorance around Covid and other pandemics, and the way people act as though it was some unprecedented event that justifies the unprecedented reaction, is really stunning.
    - throwanem 5y ago
      One might perhaps imagine that those concerned with the lessons of history would not overlook the lack of precedent for a pandemic taking place in a time of ubiquitous and nigh instantaneous global travel. Such a one would be disappointed in this case, certainly, but the expectation could be considered reasonable nonetheless.
      - AndrewBissell 5y ago
        No, this doesn't actually make the definitive difference you think it does. Many earlier pandemics had no problem spreading throughout the almost entire world in relatively short order.
    - isaacremuant 5y ago

satronaut 5y ago

what prohibits them from quarantining at home in the first place? Is there a difference between not leaving my room for 2 weeks (except to use the bathroom) and staying in a hotel for 2 weeks?

bluefirebrand 5y ago

> The app allows people who are required to isolate to opt to do their isolation at home, rather than stay at a quarantine facility. Nobody is being forced to use the app Weird. In Canada we're allowed to isolate at home without a wildly intrusive app, or police visits or anything like that. We get a fine if we are caught out when we are required to isolate, that's all. Personally if my government was proposing this kind of quarantine tracking, I'd be looking to move somewhere sane.

chopin 5y ago
Bad thing that there's almost nowhere to move. Almost everybody has their intrusive model to cope with Covid.

all2 5y ago

> managed quarantine What's that?

gorwell 5y ago

"Our oppressor isn't as bad as you've heard. They give us choices! For example, we get to choose chicken or beef for our 12pm meal." Be careful. Stockholm syndrome is real.

TrevorJ 5y ago

> The app allows people who are required to isolate to opt to do their isolation at home, rather than stay at a quarantine facility. Nobody is being forced to use the app. Oh, well I guess it's ok then. /s

908B64B197 5y ago

> The app allows people who are required to isolate to opt to do their isolation at home, rather than stay at a quarantine facility. Nobody is being forced to use the app. Wait. So if I refuse to be tracked by the government, the government will take me by force to a detention camp? Did someone accidently ran a search and replace for Cuba and Australia before publishing the article?

pathseeker 5y ago

>My guess is that they would reset your isolation duration You do know that quarantine isn't supposed to be a punishment, right? Resetting your isolation duration is punitive and has zero relationship to your ability to spread covid.