3 ms·

>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

by 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.
- Clubber 5y ago
  See the argument for having a high transmission also justifies this. It's win-win. If you have low transmission, we need to enact these laws to keep it that way. If it's a high transmission, we need to enact these laws to lower the transmission. I'm amazed people have this much trust in their government officials. I mean they're just people with the same ethical flaws as everyone else, they just have a lot more power.

by 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.

Clubber 5y ago
See the argument for having a high transmission also justifies this. It's win-win. If you have low transmission, we need to enact these laws to keep it that way. If it's a high transmission, we need to enact these laws to lower the transmission. I'm amazed people have this much trust in their government officials. I mean they're just people with the same ethical flaws as everyone else, they just have a lot more power.