Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United States Privacy Technology

America Is Reopening. Coronavirus Tracing Apps Aren't Ready. (wsj.com) 124

Posted by msmash from the cause-for-concern dept.
Smartphone apps meant to track where people have traveled or whom they have been near are mostly buggy, little-used or not ready for major rollouts, raising concerns as restrictions lift and infections rise. From a report: Local officials in Teton County, Wyo., home to Yellowstone National Park and resort town Jackson Hole, want to prevent a new wave of coronavirus cases as the area reopens. They decided to lean on technology. The county signed up for a location-tracking app developed at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to help accelerate contact tracing, the process of notifying and isolating people who might have been exposed to the virus. But as tourists stream into Yellowstone -- rangers spotted license plates from 41 states the day it reopened in mid-May -- the app isn't ready. It can't accurately track location, it's missing key features and its developers have struggled to protect sensitive user data. U.S. states and counties are placing great faith in contact tracing, in tandem with aggressive testing, as they reopen their economies. Pressure has increased as coronavirus infections rise in many states, including Arizona, Texas and Florida.

The quick spread of the coronavirus makes it hard for human contact tracers to keep up, so authorities are turning to smartphone technologies to help track where people have traveled or whom they have been near. What is emerging across the country so far, however, is a patchwork of buggy or little-used apps, made by partners ranging from startups on shoestring budgets to academics to consulting firms. Some are working with location-tracking firms that have been under fire from privacy advocates. None appears ready for a major rollout, even as more local governments ease restrictions. Utah signed a deal worth more than $6 million with a firm backed by the family of billionaire Nelson Peltz and other investors. Rhode Island hired Indian software company Infosys to build its app free. North Dakota's governor turned to an old friend who had built an app for a college football team in 2013. Apple and Alphabet's Google deployed technology that at least five U.S. states agreed to adopt, but integrating it into smartphone apps takes time and comes with significant trade-offs. Some local health departments aren't keen on privacy restrictions in the Apple-Google protocol that limit information they can collect. Others had already sunk money into Covid apps before the tech giants arrived on the scene.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

America Is Reopening. Coronavirus Tracing Apps Aren't Ready. More

America Is Reopening. Coronavirus Tracing Apps Aren't Ready.

Comments Filter:

  • We can't get people to wear loose fitting masks (Score:5, Funny)

    by rsilvergun ( 571051 ) on Tuesday June 23, 2020 @05:29PM (#60219126)
    and you've got dumb broads wearing "knitted" masks for protest. Give up on contact tracing. This is like that Onion video where Obama went to a Denny's [youtube.com] and had to scale back his plans for America.
    • For 11 years I have been missing that gem of a video. Thanks Bruh.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by egyas ( 1364223 )

      Oh man! ROFL I'm in NO WAY an Obama fan, but that video made me laugh so hard. lol

      I really wish I still had some mod points so I could upvote your comment, for that link alone! :)

    • Knitted masks are actually a step up from what I see on a day to day basis.

      But I have to agree, contact tracing apps are right out.

      • they are very clearly there to show "I'm being forced to wear this so I'm going to make sure it doesn't do anything". To put things in perspective you can see their nose and mouth through the "mask". It looks more like a cats cradle than a mask.

        That said yarn is a pretty terrible material for a mask by all accounts, even if it's fully knitted.

        • I usually see under the chin. Which would be fine if they had a tracheotomy recently and it was still exposed, but I'm willing to bet that's not the case.

          The ones I see wearing it over the mouth but under the nose, I am willing to give partial credit to. But a knit mask over the face? They're graduating top of their community college class.

      • I prefer my BatMan / Bumbuddy / Green Goblin style mask. The Anonymous mask works in a pinch (though it can get rather warm). I also have a "tricky dick" mask like in "Point Break" (but it is even warmer than the Anonymous mask).

        For cases where I need to protect myself from the unwashed masses, I also have an air-conditioned Biohazard Level 4 suit, should the need arise.

    • and you've got dumb broads wearing "knitted" masks for protest. Give up on contact tracing.

      Just wait - you'll have those same idiots installing antivirus programs and claiming that they are now protected!

    • I guess you missed the part of the epidemic where we could have made more masks but called on the American public to form an Etsy group and throw together some half-assed masks because 3M was out of stock. Even a proper gas mask is no guarantee and good luck sourcing one of those
      • You start your comment with a nebulous attack on not making enough masks that could be interpreted as either placing blame on Trump or on American in general, allowing the reader to read your comment however they want, and then you go into a lie about cloth masks being ineffective when the science on that is settled.

        I'm assuming you're Russian and that you're trying to do damage to the country. I cannot come up with any other explanation for why you would write something so expertly crafted to spread mi

  • not gonna happen (Score:5, Insightful)

    by hdyoung ( 5182939 ) on Tuesday June 23, 2020 @05:43PM (#60219196)
    The whole US way of life is predicated on individual freedoms. It works pretty well most of the time, but it does create problems of it's own. We tolerated lockdowns for a while because we were worried that the fatality rate was going to be 5%, which meant we were going to be burying literal mountains of bodies.

    Now that we know it's under 1%, it just isn't enough to take seriously. Not for such an individualistic culture. Over a hundred thousand citizens are dead from COVID, but the average American is no longer willing to put a small piece of cloth over their face when they're out shopping. Who cares if it's for the greater good, they just don't feel like it. I seriously doubt that US society will accept a second wave of lockdowns, and hell will freeze solid before there's widespread acceptance of a contact-tracing app.

    Maybe Seattle can persuade a portion of their population to go along with this stuff, but country-wide, I bet compliance will be well under 20%, and that number will trend towards zero as the year comes to a close. Good, bad, or something in between, we pay for our freedoms, and sometimes the cost is human life. There are people being interviewed who acknowledge that they've lost loved ones to COVID, and they're still not gonna wear a mask. So be it.

    I read that the EU is thinking about putting the US on the list of countries "we don't let you in because your COVID response is so bad". The Europeans have a point on this one. In a year or two we'll reach herd-immunity. The body count will be high, but things WILL go back to normal eventually.
    • You Sir, are on point. Also with the amount of unemployed, reduced salaried and furloughed employees and company wide travel restrictions most Americans will not be going to the EU anyway.

    • I think you are trying to put the entire country under one blanket policy. There are lots of places where the virus wasn't as prevalent as New York City or Seattle. Folks that live in those low impact areas may not believe wearing a mask is necessary. Until we see spikes that aren't due to additional testing and those spikes are putting a lot of people in the hospital it's tough to convince people it's necessary. As it stands, most people that are testing positive are seeing very mild symptoms or no symptom

      • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

        by joe_frisch ( 1366229 )

        The problem is that many of those areas have not had a high rate of infection .... YET.

        The value of masks is that they reduce the rate of spread and get the exponent negative rather than positive.

        Done right everyone talks about how annoying it was to wear masks for 3 months when very few people died.

        Done wrong, everyone talks about the people they knew who died of the disease and wonders why we didn't :"do something about it".

        Waiting until the disease has spread in an area, then wearing masks is missing

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by account_deleted ( 4530225 )
          Comment removed based on user account deletion

          • Your spot on for things. The data models were all off by at least an order of magnitude. That is terrible, either the models were horribly bad, or the data values fed into them were horribly bad. I strongly suspect the values fed into them were horridly bad.

            The most tragic thing about the pandemic is the complete politicization of every aspect of it. Almost nothing was done without politics being placed first. Reforms need to happen afterwards to make sure this never happens again. Society has to take polit

          • Re: (Score:3)

            by ranton ( 36917 )

            Even in NYC, where close to 100k people died of covid19, most people didn't know anyone who had even had the disease.

            So first off, 22k people have died so far in New York City, not 100k. That level of detail and comprehension of the situation continues throughout your post. I doubt you have seen a survey from New York City residents regarding whether they know someone who had the disease. Do you live in NYC or have a large number of friends there? I only know two households closely who live in NYC and both of them know people who have confirmed cases. In each instance it was colleagues or friends / acquaintances who work

            • Comment removed based on user account deletion

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by ranton ( 36917 )

                Sweden has a population of 10M. The united states has 300M. There have been just over 5000 covid19 deaths in Sweden. If the US were not locked down, it would be reasonable to expect a similar number of deaths within a margin for error. The US has 30x the population, so 30x the deaths could be expected. Thats 5,000 times 30, or 150,000 total. That is only marginally more than we have already.

                That is why you don't compare Sweden with the US; you compare it with a nation with a similar sized travel hubs, population, economy, society and location. Other Scandanavian nations are the proper comparison, where you have Norway, Finland and to a lesser extent Denmark as ready examples. Each of these nations had lock downs similar to the US and at almost the exact same time, although more properly done at a national level. They give the best sign for what the difference is between a nation with a lock do

                • I don't think you can yet compare the results of Sweden vs another country. The pandemic isn't nearly over yet. Sweden may have "invested" in herd immunity early on which may pay off in the months (years?) to follow. They definitely could have done a better job protecting their elderly though.

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by ranton ( 36917 )

                    Sweden may have "invested" in herd immunity early on which may pay off in the months (years?) to follow.

                    Sweden is working hard to downplay any insinuation that they have been attempting herd immunity, since it was becoming obvious even by the end of April that it was not a reasonable goal (most epidemiologists feel it was never a reasonable goal, but there was disagreement). By the end of May they had seen about 6.1% of the population with antibodies, when their original estimates had been a goal of 40% by that time.

                    While how things will play out over the next few years is not certain yet, it is becoming very

                • Also:

                  If you look at the findings of actual researchers on this topic our lock downs saved millions of lives across the US and Europe.

                  I don't think it's clear that any lives have been saved yet. Deaths may have just been delayed.

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by ranton ( 36917 )

                    I don't think it's clear that any lives have been saved yet. Deaths may have just been delayed.

                    The lives saved come primarily from keeping the hospitalization rates low enough that Covid-19 and non-Covid-19 patients can receive adequate care. This is how we can continue to see similar mortality rates that we are seeing now. Without that, mortality rates are expected to skyrocket.

                    • The lives saved come primarily from keeping the hospitalization rates low enough that Covid-19 and non-Covid-19 patients can receive adequate care.

                      But that's not what the article you linked to is saying. The word "hospital" is never even mentioned. This seems to be a topic that's repeatedly ignored. Slowing the spread will only temporarily prevent deaths. It's true that you don't want a spike large enough to overwhelm the medical system, but that's largely not why people are advocating for the lockdowns. People seem to think that slowing the spread is equivalent to "beating" the virus. What I'm personally more concerned about is the duration of exposu

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by ranton ( 36917 )

                      But that's not what the article you linked to is saying.

                      This article didn't make claims about deaths at all (I read it yesterday, I'm pretty sure that is correct). They were only referring to total people infected as of a certain date. That equates to less deaths overall based on flattening the curve, but it wasn't specifically addressed in that article. The value of flattening the curve was outside of that research's scope.

                      It's true that you don't want a spike large enough to overwhelm the medical system, but that's largely not why people are advocating for the lockdowns. People seem to think that slowing the spread is equivalent to "beating" the virus.

                      Some people might think that, but they are wrong. Of course there are going to be people who are following proper guidelines but don't quite

                    • delaying infections until we have more research and hopefully even better procedures to care for patients (with vaccine being the hopeful end goal).

                      I don't buy this approach. You can't just stop the world from turning and hope some handsome rockstar scientist saves everyone like in the movies. We have a real, well-established, all-natural method of almost completely preventing the spread to at-risk individuals. It just requires asking the healthy people to take one for the team. Can't do that though. If everyone isn't spared with some bulletproof vaccine then screw the elderly and screw the economy.

                • Comment removed based on user account deletion

        • The problem is that many of those areas have not had a high rate of infection .... YET

          No, they already have a high rate. Right now, nearly half of new US cases are in the South, and most of the rest in the West. Only a tiny fraction of new cases are in the Northeast. [reddit.com]

    • Maybe Seattle can persuade a portion of their population to go along with this stuff, but country-wide, I bet compliance will be well under 20%, and that number will trend towards zero as the year comes to a close. Good, bad, or something in between, we pay for our freedoms, and sometimes the cost is human life. There are people being interviewed who acknowledge that they've lost loved ones to COVID, and they're still not gonna wear a mask. So be it.

      Seattle has part of their city that in the last few weeks declared they were seceding from the U.S. so they really aren't going to go along with it either. It doesn't matter which side of the aisle you're dealing with, America has a streak of "fuck you, I'm not going to!" in one way or another. At best you can just give people the best information and hope that they make the right decision, because trying to tell them what to do is just going to get the opposite effect.

      I'm not particularly worried. The f

      • Seattle has part of their city that in the last few weeks declared they were seceding from the U.S. so they really aren't going to go along with it either.

        Meh, it's just the usual Capital Hill crowd. They're a radical left hotspot even within a very left-leaning city. Don't mistake that one small district for "Seattle".

        In the meantime, out in the Seattle suburbs, I see about 9/10 people at the grocery store wearing masks, going on about their business as best they can.

      • Using the word "autonomous" is just free speech, not secession.

        Fucking morons wilting at mild speech.

    • and we have 70,000 a year dying of treatable illnesses plus half a million medical bankruptcies a year. I wouldn't call that "pretty good".

      Patriotism is one thing but what we have I would call blind faith.

      But this isn't about personal freedom. What's going on here is that Trump & the GOP are trying to pry open the economy before it's safe because the fear a bloodbath in November from the bad economy. They could solve that with UBI and stimulus payments but the fear is that people who get used to
    • The whole US way of life is predicated on individual freedoms. In what way? Really? Submit. You are less free that the average Briton, Albanian, Icelander, Dane, German or indeed Ukranian. You believe you're free, but your police kill too many for it to be so..

      • We actually have very few individual freedoms that can't be taken away from us if it's deemed necessary. Some people just like to play chicken and see what happens. But I guarantee if we continue to see damage to businesses and COVID appears to continue for the rest of the year, laws and enforcement will happen, and they're going to be damned hard to get rid of even if/when the actual danger happens. The system is set up pretty well to make sure people with money get what they want.

        We are the living example

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward
      It isn't about an affront to our 'personal freedoms' that bothers me, it's the fact that I survived through my childhood and teen years despite the efforts of my own family and my so-called 'peers' to destroy me or push me to suicide, then I survived the financial collapse in 2008 without getting killed or ending up homeless, although I lost *everything*, then I survived working for Australian bastards who literally blackmailed the people working for them as they destroyed the company we all worked for arou
    • We tolerated lockdowns for a while because we were worried that the fatality rate was going to be 5%, which meant we were going to be burying literal mountains of bodies.

      Now that we know it's under 1%, it just isn't enough to take seriously. Not for such an individualistic culture.

      How's that again?

      The US has 128,000 deaths and 1,015,000 recovered people. A fatality rate of 11.2%. Globally, the fatality rate is 9%, so the rest of the world is doing better than the US. Where did you get the idea

      • Re:not gonna happen (Score:5, Interesting)

        by swillden ( 191260 ) <shawn-ds@willden.org> on Tuesday June 23, 2020 @07:24PM (#60219658) Journal

        The US has 128,000 deaths and 1,015,000 recovered people. A fatality rate of 11.2%. Globally, the fatality rate is 9%, so the rest of the world is doing better than the US. Where did you get the idea it was under 1%?

        I don't think a 1% infection fatality rate (IFR) is acceptable, and I don't really think anyone else who thinks about it does either -- if 80% of the US gets the disease (as seems likely, given unimpeded spread) and if 1% of them die, that's 2.6 million deaths.

        I mention that so you don't think I'm some Trumpist pooh-poohing the risks. Now to respond to your actual point: you're ignoring the difference between Infection Fatality Rate (IFR) and Case Fatality Rate (CFR). The difference between an infection and a case is that a case is identified, reported and counted, and many infections are not, particularly with COVID, since many -- perhaps a majority -- of people who are infected are completely asymptomatic and never have any clue that they were infected. As long as the medical system isn't overwhelmed, the COVID IFR does appear to be around 1% (note that there's another 2-3% that suffer permanent injury but don't die -- which on the scale of the US means another 5.2-8 million people with debilities; this is serious shit), so the difference between IFR and CFR represents the number of infections that were never identified.

        Note also that your numbers underestimate the CFR as well, too, for the simple reason that while the infection rate is growing you have a relatively large number of cases that aren't resolved yet, which incorrectly boosts the CFR denominator. Well except that there are also deaths that aren't correctly attributed to COVID, which incorrectly shrinks the CFR numerator.

        Finally, as always, it must be pointed out that the ~1% IFR holds only as long as the medical system is able to care for the larger percentage of infections that result in serious cases requiring medical support to say alive. If the healthcare system is overwhelmed, the IFR may go to 5%, or even higher. Right now there are several US states who are on course to exceed the capacity of their healthcare systems.

        • The pedantry around IFR and CFR is largely an algebra game where you change the denominator in one factor which is actually the numerator in another factor. The different between "infection" and "case" makes the IFR lower than the CFR but make the infection rate higher than the case rate by the same ratio. The product is the same, and the dead are still dead.

        • You forget that in the US if you die and happen to have Covid-19 then it is a Covid -19 death. George Floyd had Covid-19 when he died. So under those rules he is counted as a Covid-19 death. Hospitals and Nursing homes in the US get $13,000 for each Covid-19 death so they have incentive to declare as many deaths as Covid deaths. There are even people being marked as Covid-19 deaths who were never tested for Covid-19 but appeared to have some of the symptoms so they get counted. People in Hospice who are alr

          • I should mention they are NOT even doing autopsy to determine actually why these people are dying and if in fact they truly did die from Covid-19.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Where did you get the idea it was under 1%?

        Wishful thinking, obviously. If you assume enough undetected asymptomatic cases, you can get to the number. In actual reality there have been enough cases where a lot of testing was done in some spots that this does not pan out. The death rate is slowly coming down as the doctors learn how to treat this thing better, but it is still roughly around 5...10%.

    • We tolerated lockdowns for a while because we were worried that the fatality rate was going to be 5%, which meant we were going to be burying literal mountains of bodies.

      Now that we know it's under 1%, it just isn't enough to take seriously.

      Where the HELL do you get "under 1%"?

      From Worldometer's numbers for the US today [worldometers.info]:

      Coronavirus Cases:
      2,422,643
      Deaths:
      123,466
      Recovered:
      1,015,929

      That gives a current fatality rate of a tad over 6% for resolution, a tad over 5% for all known cases.

      There might be issues with t

      • >"Where the HELL do you get "under 1%"?

        More data. Your simple data takes NO account for those who were never tested yet infected and recovered.

        From the CDC:

        0.4% of people WHO FEEL SICK with Covid-19 (have symptoms), and seek help, will die.

        For people under 50 the agency estimated that 0.05% of symptomatic people will die (that is 1 in 2,000).

        And when adjusted for the 35% of people who get infected and have no symptoms and sought no care at all:

        0.26% of all people who get infected by Covid-19 will die.

        Fo

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by jbengt ( 874751 )

          0.26% of all people who get infected by Covid-19 will die.

          If that number and the numbers for flu are accurate, that's about 3 times as deadly as the flu. If it was left to run wild and 80% of the US population got it, 0.26% would be the leading cause of death and the death rate of the population as a whole would be increased by about 1/3 for that year, even if the hospitals could keep up, which they could not. (in the early 60s, there were more than 9 hospital beds for every 1,000 people in the US, now th

          • >"If that number and the numbers for flu are accurate, that's about 3 times as deadly as the flu."

            Indeed. It is still dangerous. Especially for the elderly or those with pre-existing health conditions. But it is nowhere near the initial estimates, and nowhere near "end of the world."

            Sensible precautions (until there is a vaccine or effective treatment) like wearing masks near people when you can't socially-distance from them, washing hands, entry requirements for nursing homes, etc are warranted. Lo

      • We have no public statistics on how many people recover but are permanently maimed by lung and other organ damage. The number of people who have died is not the only measure of destruction. And if you don't manage the virus and let it run rampant, many people will refuse to work, destroying the economy anyway. Contact tracing is working in Vermont, admittedly in part because it's such a rural state. The US is still are not doing enough testing and still doesn't have enough PPE, which is part of why cont
    • If America is predicated on individual freedoms, then why would there be any expectation at all that people do things for the greater good? Focusing on the self was supposed to lead to the greater good, and all evidence indicates it has. All the people who live here and think it couldn't possibly be worse anywhere else, really just don't have a lot of experience with other places. People the world over still resoundingly wish to move to the US for the very freedoms which are now disparaged.

      The point s

    • Now that we know it's under 1%, it just isn't enough to take seriously.

      It will be 5% still if we don't take preventative measures because of how contagious it is. Hospitals will get overloaded, and then people will die because they can't even get a hospital bed.

    • Mind you some of it is just due to incompetence, which is universal. We're nowhere near the US and yet our contact tracing is essentially nonexistent because once the Big Panic was over the bureaucrats went back to turf wars and CYA and bungling rather than knuckling down to get shit sorted. You could actually tell when everyone had decided we'd won by the switch from "getting shit sorted" to "faffing around pointlessly".

    • if one can readily buy, in retail stores where you get your groceries and other necessities, effective masks.

      This has nothing to do with muh Murrican freedoms. The bandit-bandana demonstrated by our Surgeon General just doesn't cut it.

      I mean scolding the citizenry of the US for thinking masks are Infectious Disease Theatre when the top political medical official in the country teaches you how to wrap a rag around your mouth and nose, this is Tom Ridge level of protect yourself against a biological war

    • "The whole US way of life is predicated on individual freedoms."

      For the wealthy, sure.

      Otherwise if you want to exercise your freedoms you need to gather in armed groups, and you'd better be white. And even then they might park a tank on your escape hatch and burn down your compound.

  • Unless they make a deal with the phone companies and force the apps on people somehow, it will never happen. Even then, I could see the majority of people in my home state finding ways to work around it due to mistrust of the government.

    • ...Unless they make a deal with the phone companies and force the apps on people somehow...

      ...bold mine...

      That would be communism. We in these United States of America loathe communism and everything associated with it.

      That kind of advice should be given to the likes of Canada, Russia, China, Venezuela etc etc...

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by PPH ( 736903 )

        That would be communism.

        No. Communism would be you choosing to install the app as a member of the collective. With no pressure from the elite class. And then you taking responsibility to notify your recent contacts on your own, should you find that you have been infected. With no hierarchy or bureaucracy involved. What you are describing is Socialism. And if it is imposed upon the entire population of the country, it would be National Socialism.

        • No, it might be fascism, if it were forced upon you and the apps did indeed enable the government to keep tabs on you. Supposedly they do not, the jury is out.

          I don't see what this has to do with economic policy. I don't consider it socialist to signal my intention to turn in traffic to other citizens, I don't think signalling "hey I have the plague" to people who might be similarly affected by my condition is any more or less socialist. We just call that "communication".

          Being required to carry an app that

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by PPH ( 736903 )

            I don't see what this has to do with economic policy.

            Or social policy. The government (or other groups) don't have to 'keep tabs' on you to abuse such apps. Plant a few dummy phones with positive flags in the entrances to businesses or venues that you don't like and generate a wave of panic among its patrons. Or in a geographic region.

            You could conceivably swing an election by triggering a wave of positive contacts in selected voting districts, prompting enough people to avoid polling places.

          • "I don't consider it socialist to signal my intention to turn in traffic to other citizens"

            I don't know that it's socialist, but it's definitely collectivism. As are all traffic laws, really. And the whole idea of having a freely accessible government-maintained road network.

    • It's ironic, because these same people carry a perfect tracking device with them everywhere.

  • I don't answer unknown numbers on my phone.

    How would I tell a valid contact tracer from a scam?

  • 1. Shocking, I know, but not everyone has a smartphone, and the only way this will work is if everyone has a smartphone with the app.
    1a. You can't require people who don't have or want a smartphone to buy a smartphone.
    2. Not everyone is going to willingly install some 'tracing app', and with good reason: they can't trust it.
    3. You can't force people to install an app on their phone. There would be a revolt. People would dump their phones.
    4. You can't force people to carry their phone with them everywher

    • Doesn't take everyone, just some modestly high percentage. Enough t get the exponential negative rather than positive

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by PPH ( 736903 )

        Doesn't take everyone

        But it will be like measles inoculations. The small group of people who claimed an exemption became big enough that we had an outbreak. Why risk the vanishingly small possibility that my child will have a bad reaction when yours can be offered up just as easily in the name of herd immunity.

        You can take mass transit too. It will be good for the environment.

        • Whether people will go for it is a different question from whether or not everyone needs it.

          I don't understand why people are concerned. if you have a phone, apple / google can track you anytime they want - you are already relying on their promise not to do so. No difference with the app.

          There are a few people with the techincal ability to actually detect tracking, but that is a vanishingly small percentage of the population.

    • You can refute ... all the above all you want but... that's how I see this happening here in the U.S.

      If someone refutes it, you should change your mind. That's how logic works.

  • It's already too late (Score:3)

    by ArhcAngel ( 247594 ) on Tuesday June 23, 2020 @08:11PM (#60219876)
    If this research [psu.edu] bears out actual infections could be 80 times the actual reported numbers are.

    The researchers found that the excess ILI showed a
    nearly perfect correlation with the spread of COVID-19
    around the country.

    Said Silverman, âoeThis suggests that ILI data is capturing COVID
    cases, and there appears to be a much greater undiagnosed
    population than originally thought.â

    Remarkably, the size of the observed surge of excess ILI
    corresponds to more than 8.7 million new cases during the last three weeks of March, compared to
    the roughly 100,000 cases that were officially reported during the same time
    period.

  • Here in Canada the Federal Government (the Occupying or Invading army) is "pushing" what they hold out as a "contact tracing" app as well, and they claim it does not collect any personal information and does not give it to the Government or Google or anyone else.

    However, they are:
    (1) Unwilling to allow inspection of the source code
    (2) Do not provide a way to assure that the source code inspected is the source code used to build the app
    (3) Unwilling to indemnify users should their assertions prove to be fals

  • I won't be participating in any "contact tracing" so this is of no interest to me.

  • Why is someone in Wyoming (or Utah), of all places, worrying about this? It's a rural state the size of Pennsylvania with less than one million population. So small, they have one f-ing congressman in the D.C. House. And Yellowstone is not exactly a movie theater.

    And the contract tracing app? You have got to be kidding me. This is the most f-up privacy violating idea ever. What could possibly go wrong? It seems like somebody is now trying hard to push the idea that an app that tracks and records all your mo

    • Why is someone in Wyoming (or Utah), of all places, worrying about this?

      At the rate of growth we've seen of COVID cases in Utah, within a month or two their hospitals will be overflowing.

      • Weren't they saying that in March?
        • I can't tell if you're trolling or serious. In March, hospitals in NY and California were weeks or days from overflowing, so we implemented a lockdown to reduce the spread of the disease. The lockdown was effective. Utah was never close to overflowing, though.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by b0bby ( 201198 )

      From what I have read about the architecture of the Apple and Google apps, they should actually be able to provide useful contact tracing information without any personal identification. That is, if you are running the app and report that you're infected, it is technically possible that your anonymous ID can be checked against any of the other anonymous IDs which came within Bluetooth range and have those others alerted, without any personal information stored and with everything being deleted in a reasonab

  • With 30k newly infected per day, the fire is still burning. All it needs to become a blaze is some fanning. And that will now be provided.

    My personal prediction is that in 8 weeks or so, it will be 100k newly infected per day, unless strong restrictions get put into place (I would say "again", but the US never really had them).

    Please note that this is not something I want, it is something I expect to happen because of the continued mismanagement of this crisis in the US.

    • Why does everyone keep quoting raw, absolute numbers? When you're testing upwards of half a million a day, 30k a day isn't bad.

      Percentage of population tested? Climbing dramatically.
      Percentage of tests positive? Dropping to lowest in months.
      Number of deaths? Dropping to lowest in months.

      Also, remember that the same person getting tested twice and coming back positive counts as two new COVID infections. Additionally, remember that the CDC has stated that the fatality rate is around 0.26% for a COVID infectio

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        30k is pretty bad. Look at some European countries to see how bad. It is completely beyond me how you can make statements that disconnected from reality. Do you _want_ your country to suffer?

        • Beautiful, real nice. Rules for radicals: ignore the entire premise of a factual statement and reinforce your distortion to try and beat down the opposition.

          Two words - fuck you.

  • The US citizens have a right to privacy. Yes it makes things harder for police and heath care workers but that's just too bad. You don't get to suspect rights because they get in your way. Your right to free speech gets in the way of a lot of things but we don't suspend that. US Citizens are NOT going to give up their right to privacy no matter how much the government wants us to or says it is for the good of the public. I for one will never give up any of my rights just because they are inconvenient at the

Slashdot Top Deals

He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion

Close