RT @mtracey: "Contract tracers" in NYC have been "instructed" not to ask people if they've attended recent protests. Which will of course limit our understanding of how much these mass gatherings contributed to virus spread. Probably by design: they don't WANT to know
Seems like it will be hard to tell if protests can spread COVID, if contact tracers not allowed to ask about it. Understand the need to keep people's politics their own business. But seems like there are other approaches?
RT @SohrabAhmari: "Contact-tracing workers hired by the city have been instructed NOT to ask anyone who’s tested positive for COVID-19 whether they recently attended a demonstration."
The lockdown is now purely a repressive apparatus for the benefit of the left.
To shield themselves and then political movements liability for the upcoming wave of cases... Not asking makes me as mad as them being out there in the first place because it shows they know how bad it’s going to be, want protests to happen anyway, and are willing to lie about it all.. fucking slime
On another note, and this is sad but probably true. Most people getting the bad cases of covid (i.e. the people who know they're sick) are old. Old people tend to not get much social contact. I'm pretty certain that alot of these folks only have a couple of people to trace, and that the tracers have very little work to actually do. Especially given the steady decline in cases.
First- de Blasio change the contact tracing project from Health Department to the Health and Hospital.
Second - interviewing and “hiring” too many contact tracer to work remotely, so a lot of them ended up not getting the job
Third - changing a remote test and trace job to 80% field work with a highly contagious virus, that can spread before symptoms appear. The contact tracer will end up being the spread of covid-19
Fourth- Protestors understand the risk they’re placing themselves in when they went out to protest during a pandemic. They went out to protest for their rights. It doesn’t make any sense why should this information not be available to contact tracer that is “trying” to do their job. It’s for the public health, it’s not about any individual or group. It’s about potential covid position patient that might be spreading to other unknowingly.
I'm old enough to remember when a small reopening protest followed by a report that X% of positive cases "attended a gathering"... ended up on the r-all frontpage with dozens of threads from every possible sub. So much outrage and serious talk about science! Mind you the report's data ended before the protest
It's an ancient legend, about 3-4 weeks ago.
Then there's the popular political talking point as to how there's no going back to normal till vast teams of contact tracers cover every minute of every new case's previous 2 weeks. Teams provided by the federal govt of course
Yeah I previously commented on that one too. One teen even tested positive! Reddit aside, there was just an UNREAL outburst on regular media, went on for days with no letup. Those teens were literal murderers.
Meanwhile there are block parties in Seattle, LA, Brooklyn etc... 1000s of people sharing food and drinks and rubbing up against each other. People from miles around, going back to their suburbs filled with the elderly. And that's *aside* from the protest marches.
Funny how people were shamed into staying home to save human life. But now you are free to gather in thousands spreading a dangerous virus and no one says anything. These protests are going to kill more people then bring any real change to society.
Your post was automatically removed for being about the coronavirus. We are allowing significant news stories as their own threads; if you think your article qualifies as major news, please message the mod team.
They keep talking about data driven...From cases to deaths to nursing homes. Its all bullshit, the data has never been so skewed. Whats the damn point of tracking anything if the data is so compromised?
I don’t really see a problem with this... it’s not like they cover their ears and yell “LALALALA” if someone says they were protesting. Instead they ask what the person has been doing in general.
A looooot of people are protesting, but it is by no measure a majority of people, it is a tiny faction. Specifically asking if you were protesting would be like specifically asking if you went to a BBQ on Memorial Day weekend, which more people likely did. Instead asking, have you been in contact with people, allows you to say, “I went to a protest, or a bbq, or I’m an uber driver, etc.” Could people lie? Of course they could, but they could lie if they were asked point blank too.
We don’t need to politicize the Corona Virus any more than it already has been. Two months from now, you will feel this same way about doctors asking, “Did you go to a Trump Rally?”.
They should make a generalized term in place of protests. People afraid of being traced for their beliefs can opt to say they attended a mass gathering, whether is was a trump rally or an anti trump protest, a BLM rally or an anti BLM rally, who gives a fuck.
**Your post/comment has been removed.**
Rule #6: Political content regarding public figures/organisations not directly relevant to COVID-19 and its global impact is not allowed.
If you have any questions you can contact the mod team [here](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/China_Flu).
^Do ^not ^direct ^message ^moderators ^about ^mod ^actions.
Why the shit would they? The protests were huge and spread over multiple days. How could they possibly use the information that someone who tested positive attended the protest since we don't have a national, automated Bluetooth/GPS based contact tracing system to find other individuals they may have been in close contact with?
Any of what? Contact tracing? Because if people act as they are supposed to, having smaller social interactions, then it can be effective at lowering the growth rate. If I test positive and then say "well, three days ago I saw Friends X, Y, and Z, and I live with my partner who went to Restaurant Q with her friends R, S, and T" then the contract tracer can inform X, Y, Z, R, S, and T to isolate and get tested, and they can inform Restaurant Q to be aware that a server or other patrons may have been exposed.
Of course, if there was a competent national response, this could all be done anonymously using a phone app and Bluetooth, but "competent national response" isn't exactly the GOP's game even when they don't have a fascist cheeto in office.
So you're supposed to tell the tracer the close people you know and were in contact with that you were in contact with them - then just cut out the middle man and tell your damn friends that you're sick!
>Of course, if there was a competent national response, this could all be done anonymously using a phone app and Bluetooth, but "competent national response" isn't exactly the GOP's game even when they don't have a fascist cheeto in office.
So you're suggesting the government forcibly track the location and movement and interactions of every person using their cell phones / bluetooth, but because Trump *WILL NOT* do this, he's the fascist?
Peak fucking clown world.
You don't need to track movement, which is the point of Bluetooth, and you can do so in a way that is anonymous, open source, and cryptographically secure. In fact, a group at the MIT media lab produced this exact app, but because there was no reasonable coordinated response of pushing a large percentage of people to use it, it's far, far less useful.
>You don't need to track movement, which is the point of Bluetooth, and you can do so in a way that is anonymous, open source, and cryptographically secure. In fact, a group at the MIT media lab produced this exact app, but because there was no reasonable coordinated response of pushing a large percentage of people to use it, it's far, far less useful.
What you describe is well-intentioned in theory, but the real-world results of these systems has shown the anonymity does not last long.
See the PATRIOT ACT and NSA domestic spying: constitutionally prohibited, but Bush promised (lied) to us and told us it'd be anonymous. Just a few short years later we had Obama spying on the Associated Press.
From the NY Times:
>On Friday, Justice Department officials revealed that they had been going through The A.P.’s records for months. The dragnet covered work, home and cellphone records used by almost 100 people at one of the oldest and most reputable news organizations.
Do you know what "cryptographically secure" means? Or "open source"? Much in the way that a password manager works, the system does not expose any private information in plaintext to the world, so the government could not do anything with this information if they wanted to. The MIT app actually does have a secure GPS tracking as well that one can choose to share with public health officials, but it could be fully disabled and you could trace contacts using nothing but encrypted IDs and Bluetooth.
>Do you know what "cryptographically secure" means?
Of course I know what it means, that's why I know it's extremely rare in the real world. See various security holes, master keys, backdoors in Apple and Microsoft's full disk encryption, etc.
>Or "open source"?
Yes, and there's plenty of real world examples of "crytographically secure" and "open source" products that were compromised by the NSA. See "TrueCrypt", a once highly regarded open source encryption software.
Bottom line here is "cryptographically secure" and government agency do not mix.
You're talking about solutions to problems that have to balance security and performance, which could not be perfectly secure because to do so would be to unacceptably lower performance. AES, which TrueCrypt used, is very secure... *for its performance level*, but it needs to be able to quickly encrypt and decrypt large amounts of data. The Bluetooth contact tracker system would have to do no such thing, and would be akin to generating keys to say, sign a Bitcoin transaction, and you could use much more secure elliptic curve cryptography, where even the current largest supercomputers on the planet couldn't come close to breaking a 256bit key. If you wanted to be completely insanely cautious, you could even use quantum-resistant cryptographic methods like lattice-based cryptography so even, say, in 20 years when we have quantum computers with thousands of stable qubits, they'd still be unbreakable.
You're confusing theory and practice.
Is it possible to construct a secure anonymous tracking system? Yes.
Will the government actually build it as such, stick to the original ethos, and not abuse it nor enlarge it's scope? Never in a million years.
The PATRIOT act was designed and intended (even promised) to only go after global terrorists and now it's being used for low level drug dealers and mobsters.