4 ms·

So the 7 day rolling avg was being put out on the news, a 7 day rolling avg means the data lags by 7 days. Ergo, only once cases had spiked would the Govt react

So the 7 day rolling avg was being put out on the news, a 7 day rolling avg means the data lags by 7 days. Ergo, only once cases had spiked would the Govt react. This justifies their existence and actions, in a "I told you so" way. Had they used a smaller rolling avg that corresponded to the minimum time it took for symptoms to appear ie 2days, the Govt could have reacted more quickly to the spikes, put people into lockdown more quickly, reduced the number of infections and deaths and then got back out of lockdown more quickly. The Govt and medical experts have blood on their hands! However it also turned out that essential workers were the main spreaders. The Germans worked out within a few months it spread up to metres at 4 degrees C which is why Chilled Food processing factories got hit. It also survived on hard surfaces better than soft surfaces. Now whilst the lockdowns were occurring, the Police were catching up with criminals they couldnt locate in the UK. By "fixing" people to a location they could carry out final surveillance to tie up the lose ends with investigations, before getting them. Alot of this was done especially in London. The military knew everything the Govt was going to announce at least two weeks before it was announced and this was relayed down the chain of command with some stuff coming out during MOD phone in's when we got to listen to Chiefs of Staff and MP or two. If you took the NHS Covid App, so this brought out into the public domain tech abilities that have until now remained possible but secret. It was also used to shut down businesses, anyone could say they had covid, report it on the NHS phone app and then that would trigger all those people in the vicinity to have to isolate. You could shut down corner shops at their peak times, which has racist elements to it, you could also shut down other businesses during peak time, by just loitering at peak like in shopping centres, then go home and then say to the NHS phone app you have tested positive. At no point were photo's demanded by the NHS phone app and yet the app would have known the phone had camera facilities. An AI could then process the photo and verify its authenticity. This wasnt done, the tech was used for malicious reasons and to bring out in public a higher level of surveillance. Edit. Should I also mention the Prime Minister was telling everyone to get onto Zoom for their meetings and then later on a zero click zero day exploit in Zoom surface which conveniently had given GCHQ enough time to hoover up data off plenty of systems. LOL When will people wake up and realise the world is run by criminals?!?

geoduck14 4y ago
> So the 7 day rolling avg was being put out on the news, a 7 day rolling avg means the data lags by 7 days. I like playing with data. Rolling averages are simple to do and they are handy at smoothing out weekend spikes. Weekend spikes were a problem in the US because a bunch of people would get tested on the weekend and Monday would show a Spike. People (and Drs) have absolutely used data to lie - but I'm not quite convinced this is an example of "blood on their hands" >However it also turned out that essential workers were the main spreaders This is tantological. The people who were active were the ones spreading it. Yes. Fact. >The military knew everything the Govt was going to announce at least two weeks before it was announced I like to think that the government was well coordinated. This doesn't seem to be a bad thing. In the US, we had clear disagreement between different gov organizations and I'm not sure that is an improvement over "2 weeks of coordination" >You could shut down corner shops at their peak times, which has racist elements to it, you could also shut down other businesses during peak time This sucks. I hadn't anticipated this impact previous to this post and I appreciate you sharing this.
greggsy 4y ago
It’s literally their job to do that kind of thing, but was there legitimate concern in the UK that they unnecessarily targeted people in a malicious way? You don’t just burn a vulnerability like that without a target.
s8s8discourse 4y ago
>It was also used to shut down businesses, anyone could say they had covid, report it on the NHS phone app and then that would trigger all those people in the vicinity to have to isolate I had significant misgivings about the app and it's efficacy. It is those misgivings that mean I don't believe this is an accurate representation. Firstly, and perhaps most importantly, a positive case report on the app had to be backed by a PCR result, which required a code provided on a positive PCR test. A bad actor as you describe would have only one shot at a malicious shut down (and would actually need to be Covid+ to do it). Secondly, the exposure limit was... generous. Proximity and duration had to be sufficient to form a close contact that would then be advised to self isolate and seek a test. People walking past a bad actor loitering outside a shopping centre would not meet this criteria. The shop keeper would... ...but shop keepers, retail staff et al by and large did not have the app. Employers were actively preventing their employees from downloading the application to prevent having to close for staff shortages while they were advised to isolate. Ignoring all of this, you get into the crux of the app with the "check ins". All venues were meant to enforce the "check in" procedure - in actuality, it was pretty much only restaurants that did so. Even if you "checked in" to a venue, _you had no ability to check out_ so that if a positive case was reported on the same day you happened to be at a venue, even hours apart, you would be flagged. This meant that every positive venue ping had to be reviewed by a person, who would be tasked with reviewing which of the contacts in the venue should be contact traced. The criteria for doing so was opaque - and without the knowledge of what time people left vs arrived - and the actual device:device exposure being invisible to the contract tracer - we can only surmise that an element of inference and good old fashioned guess work was at play. And as was publicised at the time - the contract tracers found themselves with very little work to do. >Should I also mention the Prime Minister was telling everyone to get onto Zoom for their meetings and then later on a zero click zero day exploit in Zoom surface which conveniently had given GCHQ enough time to hoover up data off plenty of systems. LOL The Prime Minister has repeatedly demonstrated himself to be fundamentally incapable of understanding even the most basic aspects of his job, let alone technology. Hanlon's Razor comes to mind here.

geoduck14 4y ago

> So the 7 day rolling avg was being put out on the news, a 7 day rolling avg means the data lags by 7 days. I like playing with data. Rolling averages are simple to do and they are handy at smoothing out weekend spikes. Weekend spikes were a problem in the US because a bunch of people would get tested on the weekend and Monday would show a Spike. People (and Drs) have absolutely used data to lie - but I'm not quite convinced this is an example of "blood on their hands" >However it also turned out that essential workers were the main spreaders This is tantological. The people who were active were the ones spreading it. Yes. Fact. >The military knew everything the Govt was going to announce at least two weeks before it was announced I like to think that the government was well coordinated. This doesn't seem to be a bad thing. In the US, we had clear disagreement between different gov organizations and I'm not sure that is an improvement over "2 weeks of coordination" >You could shut down corner shops at their peak times, which has racist elements to it, you could also shut down other businesses during peak time This sucks. I hadn't anticipated this impact previous to this post and I appreciate you sharing this.

greggsy 4y ago

It’s literally their job to do that kind of thing, but was there legitimate concern in the UK that they unnecessarily targeted people in a malicious way? You don’t just burn a vulnerability like that without a target.

s8s8discourse 4y ago

>It was also used to shut down businesses, anyone could say they had covid, report it on the NHS phone app and then that would trigger all those people in the vicinity to have to isolate I had significant misgivings about the app and it's efficacy. It is those misgivings that mean I don't believe this is an accurate representation. Firstly, and perhaps most importantly, a positive case report on the app had to be backed by a PCR result, which required a code provided on a positive PCR test. A bad actor as you describe would have only one shot at a malicious shut down (and would actually need to be Covid+ to do it). Secondly, the exposure limit was... generous. Proximity and duration had to be sufficient to form a close contact that would then be advised to self isolate and seek a test. People walking past a bad actor loitering outside a shopping centre would not meet this criteria. The shop keeper would... ...but shop keepers, retail staff et al by and large did not have the app. Employers were actively preventing their employees from downloading the application to prevent having to close for staff shortages while they were advised to isolate. Ignoring all of this, you get into the crux of the app with the "check ins". All venues were meant to enforce the "check in" procedure - in actuality, it was pretty much only restaurants that did so. Even if you "checked in" to a venue, _you had no ability to check out_ so that if a positive case was reported on the same day you happened to be at a venue, even hours apart, you would be flagged. This meant that every positive venue ping had to be reviewed by a person, who would be tasked with reviewing which of the contacts in the venue should be contact traced. The criteria for doing so was opaque - and without the knowledge of what time people left vs arrived - and the actual device:device exposure being invisible to the contract tracer - we can only surmise that an element of inference and good old fashioned guess work was at play. And as was publicised at the time - the contract tracers found themselves with very little work to do. >Should I also mention the Prime Minister was telling everyone to get onto Zoom for their meetings and then later on a zero click zero day exploit in Zoom surface which conveniently had given GCHQ enough time to hoover up data off plenty of systems. LOL The Prime Minister has repeatedly demonstrated himself to be fundamentally incapable of understanding even the most basic aspects of his job, let alone technology. Hanlon's Razor comes to mind here.