Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by Lustre, Apr 14, 2020.
HIV doesn't give them a mandate to intrude into every aspect of or lives like a flu does.
The federal government has released its proposed laws to underpin privacy protections for the coronavirus contact tracing app.
Business owners who ban people from entry unless they have downloaded the government's coronavirus contact tracing app will face five years in jail and a $63,000 fine under proposed laws.
The government has released a draft of its legislative backing to privacy and data protections for the COVIDSafe tracing app.
It proposes to make it illegal for anyone to refuse a person without the app entry to a public place, ban them from an activity or refuse to buy or sell goods and services to them.
That's a positive development but it still doesn't convince me to download the app. Note: the proposed legislation has "A sunset clause in the legislation says the privacy protections and offences will end 90 days after the minister determines the app is no longer needed.......that'll be never in political speak.
This is our gold stars and we are german Jews in the 1930's
Gross infringement upon business owner’s rights.
Exactly. If a business chooses to turn away paying customers, especially in this environment, the free market will sort them out. No gov fine needed.
What like the right to open? The right to let customers sit inside your establishment?
The right to decide who you let into your private property.
I presume you let anybody into your house without vetting them first?
Reminds me of the legislation passed making it an offence for businesses to discriminate against same-sex marriage eg Christian bakers being forced to bake cakes for fat[/] gay weddings.
Edited auto-correct. Fat?
No, China used face recognition cameras, and can issue a ticket via Wechat & deduct your Alipay money instantly
only in Singapore we have such App, and Oz
no idea. nothing they do follows any conventions of logic or reason.
why don't they have apps to monitor what you eat and drink and how much exercise you do? health conditions caused by peoples own stupid behaviour kills more people than this virus ever will.
after all they seem so concerned about "public safety"
Don’t look for logic in legislation
I like this idea
Never before have I so much wanted to send the most disturbing message I can think of back, but they would not care, and it would only gross-out the poor bastard that has to sit there and check it if anyone does
As others have said, this is a gross infringement again on people's rights, that story of the Christian bakers was the first thing that came to my mind with this, I have the right to refuse to have the app, they have the right to refuse service it's that simple
don't worry, i tried to reply saying not a chance in hell but it failed as it isn't a service that can be replied to.
Strathfield Council under investigation for allegedly making workers download app
Strathfield Council is under investigation by the federal Department of Health following reports it required its employees to download the government's coronavirus contact tracing app.
The Daily Telegraph reported yesterday that council workers were being told they would need to download the app onto their work smartphones.
Addressing media this morning, federal Health Minister Greg Hunt said, although privacy legislation creating jail terms and tough fines for misuse of the app's data is not being put to Parliament until next week, coercing someone to download the app was still illegal under the Biosecurity Act.
"It is illegal to coerce anybody to download the app," he said.
"The Department of Health is investigating and I've had this confirmed to me by the secretary of the department today.
"They will be investigating and they will make absolutely clear that, if this is accurate, it is unacceptable and further steps will be taken if it is not rectified immediately."
"Their work smartphones." Maybe okay, just leave the phone at work each day. If you miss out on a late night call, they'll know why!
If its their work smartphones then I believe as the ultimate owner of the phones the council has the right to enforce the download, if people are stupid enough to use it as their personal phone that is their problem. By the same token I fully agree with sammysilver, just leave the damned thing at work. I have been having that argument with one client for years and they still have not given up, if I am not employed to be onsite for you, or to be on call (which I am not) then do not call me as my phone is left at home and and Do Not Disturb, they do not like it but there is nothing they can do about it
Lo and behold.
The UK's similar app appears to have it's own set of issues.
The UK state’s desire to keep tabs on us via smartphone apps is sinister. Fortunately, it’s turning into another Covid-19 cock-up
Rob Lyons is a UK journalist specialising in science, environmental and health issues. He is the author of 'Panic on a Plate: How Society Developed an Eating Disorder'.
7 May, 2020 07:20 / Updated 2 days ago
Get short URL
© Reuters / Isla Binnie
The UK government has rolled out an app to help trace people at risk of developing the virus. But their centralised approach - never mind concerns about the technology and privacy - means it’s unlikely to work at all.
With many countries starting to come out of lockdown, a route back to something like normality might be a ‘test, track and trace’ system. However, by not paying sufficient attention to privacy and technical concerns, the UK government seems to be making a mess of it.
Here's how it's supposed to work. We test people for Covid-19 or they could report symptoms which look like they might have the virus. If they are diagnosed with it, we ensure that they and everyone they have had contact with isolates themselves for two weeks. That should quickly cut off the chain of transmission.
Also on rt.com UK spy agency handed extra powers to access info from NHS IT systems during Covid-19 pandemic
Normally, this would be done by asking an infected person who they have been in contact with and letting those people know they could be infected, too. That's easy enough with sexually transmitted diseases - our partners are hopefully memorable - but with a highly infectious disease like Covid-19, that would be less reliable and very laborious.
The rise of the smartphone offers the possibility of automated contact tracing. The technology appears to be viable, if not without complications. Millions of people would need to install an app, which sends out an anonymous code via Bluetooth, which can be received by nearby phones, and also records codes sent from those phones. The upshot is that each phone has a database of who they've been close to.
Here’s the central(ised) problem
If the app user is diagnosed with Covid-19, they can then send the mini-database of contacts up to a centralised server. They will be alerted and asked to isolate themselves for up to 14 days. In theory, if it all worked, people would be isolated from society before they had the chance to pass the disease on, quickly suppressing the prevalence of the virus.
Useless & invasive? UK’s Covid-19 contact tracing app gets bad reviews after reportedly failing all performance tests
The trouble is that the way the UK is doing all this in a different way to many other countries. From the narrow view of public health, the UK approach has some merits. But for reasons of technology, human rights law and privacy, it is more questionable and - most important - may very well not work at all. It’s had a very poor start during its trial on the Isle of Wight this week.
Are we facing another Covid cock-up because of the desire of UK health officials to be in control?
Essentially, there are two different ways for getting the app to work. Both demand that when someone is diagnosed with Covid-19, their data is uploaded to a central database. The crucial part is what that data contains and how it is processed.
In a model called Decentralized Privacy-Preserving Proximity Tracing (DP-3T), each phone using the app regularly downloads a report of the codes associated with a confirmed infection. If one of those codes matches the code in the phone's own database, the person should isolate themselves.
All the work of matching codes takes place on the user's phone, not on the central server.
That way, nobody knows who owns which phone, or which phone is associated with an infection. According to Google, DP-3T “heavily inspired” their own protocol agreed with Apple.
Fears of ‘mission-creep’
In the NHS model, however, the process of code-checking happens on its central server. Users also need to provide the first four characters of their postcode, too. This is not, on the face of it, a malicious attempt to grab more data. Having a bit more information that could help with modelling the spread of the virus and identifying people - anonymously - who could spread the virus more easily. The central health team wouldn't be able to associate that data with a particular person, but they could rate interactions with those people as more risky and possibly tell more people to isolate themselves than they would with a less-risky contact.
The only point when a person is ‘revealed’ as a Covid-19 case is if they have been diagnosed with the disease and request a test. Otherwise, it is anonymous and their contacts can remain anonymous unless they also ask for a test.
The NHS model does seem to have made very serious attempts to protect privacy, although there will still be reasonable doubts about how governments handle any data about us. There is always a danger of ‘mission creep’, where data is used for another purpose beyond the original one intended.
Will 80 percent of smartphone users sign up?
The trouble for the NHS is that Apple and Google have a very large say in all this and - perhaps to the astonishment of many people with experience of their business models - they are taking a hard line on personal privacy.
The vast majority of smartphones (well over 99 percent) use either Google's Android operating system or Apple's iOS. So what those companies say matters. And mindful of the track record of governments on privacy, they have decided that they will only allow tracing apps to use Bluetooth “in the background” if they adhere to a decentralised model. Indeed, they now call their project “exposure notification” rather than “contact tracing.”
Also on rt.com Google & Apple set some lucky programmers up for lucrative monopoly with new rules for contact-tracing app
The NHS tech experts say they have a workaround so their app will work without needing Bluetooth to run in the background. Most commentators remain unconvinced.
There are even more hurdles to jump, even if the NHS app gets over these technical barriers. First, you need a sizeable proportion of the population to take part. Since many people don't own a smartphone, it is estimated that 80 percent of smartphone users would need to download and use the app. So the whole thing needs to be very easy to install and use - and all those users need to be confident about what is happening to their data.
Second, even if enough people use the app, it will quickly become discredited if it doesn't work correctly. If there are a lot of false positives with it, users will simply stop isolating themselves in response to a request from the app to do so.
And the CIA’s somehow involved, too?
How will the app judge if someone has been in close enough contact with a virus carrier? Spending an hour within 10 metres of each other is unlikely to allow for transmission; spending a few seconds talking within a metre or so might well be enough to pass the virus on. But it's not necessarily that easy. For example, how can the app know that you were very close to each other, but either side of a perspex screen?
And even if the app works, the privacy concerns are dealt with and enough people download it, it may not be enough. Modellers have looked at the impact of a fully functional smartphone app and concluded that, on its own, it couldn't bring the reproduction rate - the much-discussed “R number” - down below 1. In other words, on average, every person with the virus would go on to infect more than one other person and the epidemic would take off again.
Also on rt.com Contact-tracing app will be ‘key part’ of UK government’s Covid-19 ‘surveillance programme’ – Johnson spokesman
‘Test, track and trace’ is no panacea. Nonetheless, done quickly and effectively, a smartphone app could be an important part of ending the lockdown.
But if the NHS doesn't solve the multiple problems the app currently seems to face, probably by accepting the decentralised model put forward by Apple and Google, it is highly unlikely that enough people would use it to make it work as a track-and-trace option. It doesn't help that NHSX, the NHS's digital arm, is working with Palantir, the controversial data-processing giant that is part-funded by the CIA.
How long before the government gets the message?
Separate names with a comma.