4 ms·
> that still doesn't mean it is actually useful to stop a pandemic You're arguing against ghosts. That is not what I said, or even implied. I wrote: > It is e
by BoxFour 3y ago
> that still doesn't mean it is actually useful to stop a pandemic
You're arguing against ghosts. That is not what I said, or even implied. I wrote:
> It is evident that having knowledge of individuals' travel destinations would undoubtedly assist in contact tracing efforts.
Tracking movement is obviously helpful for contact tracing, because you can track the proximity of individuals to each other and warn those who were near a confirmed case.
I wrote absolutely nothing on whether contact tracing is impactful, and I wrote nothing about whether you could accomplish the same result in a different way. The usefulness of contract tracing is not a conversation I wish to engage in.
- mardifoufs 3y agoOk, how do you define a contact then? How can it be evident that tracking locations is obviously helpful for contact tracing without defining what it means to trace a contact? That's why evidence would be helpful here. How does knowing a location helps with determining a contact, especially for coarser tracking like know where someone is travelling. You keep repeating that it is obvious and again, saying that something is just... obvious is not enough when discussing dangerous, almost "dual use" methods like contact tracing using mass tracking.
- BoxFour 3y ago> Ok, how do you define a contact then? You'll have to ask the Chinese CDC, I'm sure they have an answer for you much like our own CDCs do. It's usually some combination of time and distance proximity to a confirmed COVID case.
- mardifoufs 3y agoI'll actually look into it, it sounds more interesting now that I started reading about it. Sorry if my comments sounded antagonistic, I was genuinely wondering. I'll dive into the rabbit hole now!