Hi all,
A controversial topic but an important consideration to make considering the current public health implications. Please read this article and if you feel you can contribute to safely accelerating this, please be in touch with
Tom Barraclough:
tom@brainbox.institute
The proposal is toāwithout consentātrack your every step. The justification is āa crisisā. The authorās rationale is:
āMy personal view is that, with appropriate technical and other supervision, the undeniable privacy implications of using this[sic] data could be managed. Further, any consequent risk is justified given the scale of the crisis we face.ā
There are some ideas that are overtly dumb. This is not one of those ideas.
There are some ideas that are bad, but seduce us by appearing to be āeasily mitigatedā, or āon the side of goodā. Such ideas can often be defended along the lines of ālet us do a small evil, so that a lot of good can resultā. Disagreement with such ideas can often be successfully quashed using the line āDonāt give me that tired, old, slippery slope argumentā. This is however not one of those ideas either.
This proposal is more than just an intrusive violation of any rights to privacy that you might still have. It is more than just total abnegation of the intentions of the GDPR (https://gdpr-info.eu/). It fundamentally misunderstands how epidemics (and indeed pandemics) work, and how we counteract them.
If we are to quash COVID-19 in New Zealand, the most important thing is to get everyone, or almost everyone on board. I believe that the Government (and especially, Jacinda Ardern) has so far done a spectacularly good job of this. Their timing has been about as good as you can get in moving fast but still taking us along for the ride. Surely you need appropriate policing for those who conspicuously break the rules. But this proposal is something different.
Can you see that the proposed measure will piss off a substantial number of people (including me). So far Iāve been pretty damn obsessive in confining myself to my bubble. If you want me to turn off my cellphone and get out there, protesting in the streets and spitting on the āDonāt spitā signs, then enact this sort of measure. I donāt think Iāll be alone, either.
Simply by breaking trust, this measure would do incalculable damage to control of the spread of COVID-19 in New Zealand. Itās not that I have something to hide. Like most sensible people, however, I have intrinsic distrust of people who say things like āThe innocent have nothing to fearā. Iāve seen how things like āinnocenceā can be re-defined. You might go back and read ā1984ā again.
Donāt even think about it.
My 2c, Dr Jo.
P.S. Did you see that in Singapore, gay rights have just received another brutal body blow? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-52098362 Can you see the relevance of this observation to your proposal?
Thanks for your comments Jo,
Iām not necessarily suggesting we do exactly what the author proposes, Iām suggesting that we need a transparent conversation of the benefits and challenges and whether there is a way to find a balanced approach to eradicate the spread of Covid19.
Iāll pass on your comments.
Additionally, the UK are considering using similar approaches via their NHS app:
Hi Michael,
Just to add my thoughts to the discussion.
As a technologist who for various reasons has recorded his location via phone for many years, the accuracy is still woeful and more a general reminder in time. My phone loses signal in buildings and successfully records that I was in whatever shop is nearest to the traffic lights that I stopped at.
From the data science perspective, good luck with the vast number crunching required to overlay all the signals and then create the appropriate geospatial map. Err and the folks without a smartphone will be the new literally invisible people in society.
Context is everything from a philosophical perspective. I only have relative privacy now. My name, etc is on the medical register and electoral rolls. When I lived rurally everybody knew everything. When I stayed in London someone, saw everything or at least everyone though they did so I got my camera bag back when I left it on the train station whilst jet lagged.
More importantly, I live in a society with a social contract. If I get sick, I am not alone and can expect the state to care for me and this needs planning. If I refuse care for my infectious disease eg TB, Syphilis or HIV, then I can held to receive care in Prison for my good and societies good.
For my own benefit, I need to contribute taxes, data and time to pay it forward for when I need a health system. I also pay for general services sometimes with data, other times with money. These bargains I enter into freely. I can move country, I can decline the service or change providers or vote for a change at the next General Election.
So would I carry a RFID tag, probably depending on whatās in it for me. If one reduced my car insurance so I get the benefits of my boring driving and the chance to recover a stolen car, absolutely. Dubious geo-location data, even in a pandemic probably not. In the US regardless of circumstances, definitely not.
After 25 years as a Police Medical Officer, most crimes were solved by talking to people and not clever forensics. I suspect the same is true in contact tracing.