The UK response to Covid-19 [MOD WARNING 1ST POST]

04-05-2020 05:00PM

If you read how the South Koreans have used technology it sounds pretty useful.

Imagine contact tracing in London at the start of all this.

“have you been in close proximity with anyone in the last two weeks?”

“Well every morning I caught the south bound bakerloo line from Paddington, usually watching two trains come and go before I can get on one, then change to the Jubilee line at Baker Street, I usually see three or four packed tube trains come and go there before boarding one....,”

bob mcbob · 04-05-2020 05:00PM

Interesting story in the Guardian blog

A French hospital has retested old samples from pneumonia patients and discovered that it treated a man who had Covid-19 as early as 27 December, nearly a month before the French government confirmed its first cases.

The man hadn't been to China or anywhere else but his wife worked in a supermarket next to the a Sushi stand where some Chinese origin workers worked.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2020/may/04/coronavirus-live-news-mike-pompeo-pushes-virus-lab-theory-as-brazil-passes-100000-cases

theological · 04-05-2020 05:02PM

Brussels Sprout wrote: »

Well personally I'm more offended by the content and intent behind the average article written by either of those two gentlemen. Sometimes the use of vulgar language to describe someone can hit the spot in a manner that more cultured adjectives just don't. Of course, you can't throw out any old 4-letter word. There's an art to it and I think that "professional pricks" scores well in being alliterative, succinct and wholly accurate.

Perhaps that's a product of the environment that I grew up in. I'm a big fan of the way that creator of The Wire, David Simon, dispenses with his trolls on twitter using the most wonderful profanities.

I'm not offended, I'm happy for people to use their free speech to say what they want, but I prefer reason to ad hominems.

One - provide the article so we can discuss it. Two - provide reasoning as to why it is objectionable, and three - be open to opposing views.

Name calling doesn't get into the issues, nor is it particularly interesting. Apparently it seems to be OK on boards though.

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

I have no intention whatsoever of installing it. I do not trust the Conservative party one bit and it's odd that so many people here are trying to shut down criticism of it by various means.

Nonsense. I'm fully open to anyone saying anything they like as long as they are willing to be challenged about it.

BonnieSituation · 04-05-2020 05:18PM

robinph wrote: »

It took The Irish Times two weeks after that "study" initially came out before they wrote an article about it, and in the meantime it have been found it wasn't anything like what the initial Medium article had claimed, the people who ran the "study" denied it was what the Medium article claimed and there are far more articles explaining why it's nonsence out there now:

https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/4/24/21233226/coronavirus-runners-cyclists-airborne-infectious-dose?fbclid=IwAR0jepQdeGSOQchlRirZZhSpsjD-haB3UY_XWgdI7R8xLz8sWHcdJYvbd5M

Unfortunately, the article got out and now people think they will die from being on the opposite side of the street from someone who is breathing slightly heavily.

I literally picked the first link that came up. It concerns me not. I don't race. I just thought I'd lob it out to you because you seemed to have notions about the apparent safety of running.

I mean I even noted the "contrary views" and suggested you go off and have a look.

Awful testy some people are. Finding criticism where there is none.

BonnieSituation · 04-05-2020 05:20PM

theological wrote: »

Nonsense. I'm fully open to anyone saying anything they like as long as they are willing to be challenged about it.

You don't understand why ancapailldorcha may not want to install an app that gives this Tory government access to more data?

BonnieSituation · 04-05-2020 05:21PM

They are saying that there's 28734 deaths in ALL settings.

What does ALL mean in this instance?

theological · 04-05-2020 05:27PM

BonnieSituation wrote: »

You don't understand why ancapailldorcha may not want to install an app that gives this Tory government access to more data?

I was responding to the bit of the post where it was claimed that people wish to shut down discussion. This isn't true.

Aegir wrote: »

If you read how the South Koreans have used technology it sounds pretty useful.

Imagine contact tracing in London at the start of all this.

“have you been in close proximity with anyone in the last two weeks?”

“Well every morning I caught the south bound bakerloo line from Paddington, usually watching two trains come and go before I can get on one, then change to the Jubilee line at Baker Street, I usually see three or four packed tube trains come and go there before boarding one....,”

Totally, without technology contact tracing is only as effective as someone's memory also.

I'm not sure the concerns about the technology are well founded. An anonymised ID that is generated and hashed with the time slot that is exchanged over Bluetooth isn't a massive concern for privacy. The location data isn't even required.

Hopefully the health secretary ensures that the source code is public like he originally promised.

The privacy concern to me seems minimal. Possibly if someone had only seen one person in the last week and they are then informed that they had been exposed to the virus then perhaps one could deduce this, but that's a pretty limited risk.

Here's a good video about the idea involved here:

ancapailldorcha · 04-05-2020 05:31PM

robinph wrote: »

Being a non public transport user, non office worker, non shopping centre visiting person I'm not sure it would be of much use to me. The one common situation I'd find myself in crowds (running races) would be one where people would often not be carrying their mobile on them anyway, it's also a situation where despite being in close proximity to others there is limited risk of transmission from looking at someones elses back or from someone else looking at mine. Need to see more details about how they are actually doing it yet though, as it's all a bit vague so far.

Same here. Aside from going to Asda and my constitutional, I see no real need for it.

Aegir wrote: »

If you read how the South Koreans have used technology it sounds pretty useful.

Imagine contact tracing in London at the start of all this.

“have you been in close proximity with anyone in the last two weeks?”

“Well every morning I caught the south bound bakerloo line from Paddington, usually watching two trains come and go before I can get on one, then change to the Jubilee line at Baker Street, I usually see three or four packed tube trains come and go there before boarding one....,”

Different culture. I don't know off hand how much South Koreans trust their government but given the way abuse of people's data has been permitted in the last few years in the UK, namely the Cambridge Analytica scandal then it's not surprising that people are skeptical. This is the same country that refused the idea of national ID cards, quite rightly IMO.

A Dub in Glasgo · 04-05-2020 05:44PM

BonnieSituation wrote: »

They are saying that there's 28734 deaths in ALL settings.

What does ALL mean in this instance?

The UK figures only include patients who tested positive for COVID-19 and the all means irrespective of where they died (hospital, care home, home)

'Total number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths
28,734
Deaths of people who have had a positive test result confirmed by a Public Health or NHS laboratory'

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/#countries

Enzokk · 04-05-2020 05:47PM

That was strange, Hancock just announced they have the capacity to do 108 000 tests per day. Weird how you would announce you did more than this a few days ago.

Great that they reached the 100 000 capacity just after their target. That is some good work, although why the big announcement to say you reached the target a few days ago when you obviously didn't is just another example why this government makes it hard to trust.

BonnieSituation · 04-05-2020 05:48PM

theological wrote: »

I'm not sure the concerns about the technology are well founded. An anonymised ID that is generated and hashed with the time slot that is exchanged over Bluetooth isn't a massive concern for privacy. The location data isn't even required.

Hopefully the health secretary ensures that the source code is public like he originally promised.

The privacy concern to me seems minimal. Possibly if someone had only seen one person in the last week and they are then informed that they had been exposed to the virus then perhaps one could deduce this, but that's a pretty limited risk.

Here's a good video about the idea involved here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=

The concerns aren't so much about the technology. The concerns are about "THIS government" and their access to the information.

Technology can be as good or as bad as a provider wants it to be.

Given they still can't be upfront about testing numbers and their history from May as Home Sec to the CA scandal then I would take their assurances with a quarry of salt.

BonnieSituation · 04-05-2020 05:49PM

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

The UK figures only include patients who tested positive for COVID-19 and the all means irrespective of where they died (hospital, care home, home)

'Total number of COVID-19 associated UK deaths
28,734
Deaths of people who have had a positive test result confirmed by a Public Health or NHS laboratory'

https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/#countries

I had assumed. But you know how it is with these people.

BonnieSituation · 04-05-2020 05:51PM

Enzokk wrote: »

That was strange, Hancock just announced they have the capacity to do 108 000 tests per day. Weird how you would announce you did more than this a few days ago.

Great that they reached the 100 000 capacity just after their target. That is some good work, although why the big announcement to say you reached the target a few days ago when you obviously didn't is just another example why this government makes it hard to trust.

Interesting to hear how careful he was to say "capacity" as well.

The outcry, I'm sure, will be only massive.

RobMc59 · 04-05-2020 05:51PM

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I don't think that post encouraged anything.

The sensitive disposition of our resident Brits is really something to behold.

Calling Toby Young and Brendan O'Neill "professional pricks" has elicited the most jaw dropping amount of Helen Lovejoy-esque responses.

Care to comment on the 100000 target being missed within a day or so of the profusion of praise they got for "reaching" it*?

Or anything else for that matter?

Like how you would be mad to allow this UK government to have your location data given their history and the fact that GNSS is unreliable (for this task) by design, at the level of a smartphone at the level they want to use it for? How multipath signals, especially in London will ruin whatever data they have anyway and also, how they're leaving Galileo so what would the point be?

Edit: I see they're using Bluetooth for the spatial ranging and location. Need to read more so. Still a terrifying vista for this government to have the data.

*reaching it only because they doctored the numbers.

The UK test figure boards obsession does`nt seem to be going away,I think if the test figures are going up that`s a good thing.
I was`nt going to post about the `professional prick`post but as you brought it up...
I don`t like O`Neil and don`t know Young although after a quick search about him would agree he`s an unpleasant character.That`s not what I objected to originally.I`ve had posts deleted and infractions for saying similar things in the past. Being civil is a requirement for all I`d have thought?

theological · 04-05-2020 05:53PM

BonnieSituation wrote: »

The concerns aren't so much about the technology. The concerns are about "THIS government" and their access to the information.

Technology can be as good or as bad as a provider wants it to be.

Given they still can't be upfront about testing numbers and their history from May as Home Sec to the CA scandal then I would take their assurances with a quarry of salt.

If the source code is going to be made public, as the government have said, then they will be caught red handed if there is anything in there that undermines privacy. Millions of software developers will be able to have a look. The video above explains the computer science behind it and what privacy concerns there could be depending on the solution but given that it doesn't require location services and the ids are anonymous and changing every 15 minutes if the Computerphile video I linked to above is similar to how the government's solution will work then the risk is limited apart from people maybe being able to mentally deduce based on who they were with.

It would be terrible though if people decided not to use this app based on unfounded fears over privacy when it can very genuinely save lives and protect our personal health.

BonnieSituation · 04-05-2020 05:58PM

theological wrote: »

If the source code is going to be made public, as the government have said, then they will be caught red handed if there is anything in there that undermines privacy. Millions of software developers will be able to have a look. The video above explains the computer science behind it and what privacy concerns there could be depending on the solution but given that it doesn't require location services and the ids are anonymous and changing every 15 minutes if the Computerphile video I linked to above is similar to how the government's solution will work then the risk is limited apart from people maybe being able to mentally deduce based on who they were with.

It would be terrible though if people decided not to use this app based on unfounded fears over privacy when it can very genuinely save lives and protect our personal health.

Exactly so why not reserve judgement about it and have a healthy scepticism about it given who are behind it.

Also, if you think they won't brazen out any controversy you're highly optimistic.

BonnieSituation · 04-05-2020 06:04PM

RobMc59 wrote: »

The UK test figure boards obsession does`nt seem to be going away,I think if the test figures are going up that`s a good thing.
I was`nt going to post about the `professional prick`post but as you brought it up...
I don`t like O`Neil and don`t know Young although after a quick search about him would agree he`s an unpleasant character.That`s not what I objected to originally.I`ve had posts deleted and infractions for saying similar things in the past. Being civil is a requirement for all I`d have thought?

Should it go away because you don't like it? It's sad that you like being lied to.

---

Civility only works to a point though. Succinctly putting down these charlatans is sometimes all you need to do.

theological · 04-05-2020 06:06PM

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Exactly so why not reserve judgement about it and have a healthy scepticism about it given who are behind it.

Also, if you think they won't brazen out any controversy you're highly optimistic.

I still ask - given what we know so far about the governments approach in designing the app. Most data stored locally on the phone until there is a reported case of COVID-19, use of Bluetooth data (which doesn't need any information about location), id's being entirely anonymised. Plus the transparency of making the code public.

Given these factors, I've got no scepticism at all. If the app helps us to save the lives of others, and if it helps me to protect my personal health then if it is secure data wise, I will certainly install it.

Scepticism is fine, but when it verges on conspiracy then it stops being reasonable given what we know about the approach taken.

BonnieSituation wrote: »

I don't think that post encouraged anything.

The sensitive disposition of our resident Brits is really something to behold.

Calling Toby Young and Brendan O'Neill "professional pricks" has elicited the most jaw dropping amount of Helen Lovejoy-esque responses.

You don't have to be British to expect rational discussion based on good arguments and not on ad hominems.

I'm Irish. It's just unfortunate that people expect me and others to fit into a hive mind based on nationality.

Leroy42 · 04-05-2020 06:30PM

You have no scepticism despite this government continually lying to you? Johnson lied about accepting the NI WA?. (no PM would ever accept it - unless we change the name from a backstop to a frontstop!) He lied during the Brexit campaign. He lied during the recent election. The government lied, repeatedly about the EU procurement scheme. One of his cabinet members lied about having secret meetings with Israeli ambassadors.

They lied about the SAGE group. They lied about Johnson missing Cobra meetings. They lied about the testing figures last week.

Yet you are just going to go along with whatever they say because they say they are legit, double pinky promise, this time?

RobMc59 · 04-05-2020 06:37PM

BonnieSituation wrote: »

Should it go away because you don't like it? It's sad that you like being lied to.

---

Civility only works to a point though. Succinctly putting down these charlatans is sometimes all you need to do.

It`s common knowledge there were many tests counted which had been posted.To imply the UK public is`nt aware of that is untrue-people are beginning to question the way this crisis has been handled but for now we have to pull together until the dust begins to settle.
The UK press can be exasperating but will dig and dig if they `smell a rat`.

Joe_ Public · 04-05-2020 06:42PM

You are shortly to present an initiative that depends on a huge amount of trust and transparency and it's then revealed you have been awarding contracts to companies without tender, one of them with links to Dom Cummings and a former leading official in the data law breaking Vote Leave.

I would say that's extraordinary but it isn't really, it's just another episode in the life of a chronically untrusworthy government.

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/04/22/palantir-coronavirus-contract-did-not-go-to-competitive-tender/

theological · 04-05-2020 06:47PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

You are shortly to present an initiative that depends on a huge amount of trust and transparency and it's then revealed you have been awarding contracts to companies without tender, one of them with links to Dom Cummings and a former leading official in the data law breaking Vote Leave.

I would say that's extraordinary but it isn't really, it's just another episode in the life of a chronically untrusworthy government.

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/04/22/palantir-coronavirus-contract-did-not-go-to-competitive-tender/

The thing is it doesn't require trust. I can read the code and check out what it is doing before I install it on my phone.

Leroy42 · 04-05-2020 06:50PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

You are shortly to present an initiative that depends on a huge amount of trust and transparency and it's then revealed you have been awarding contracts to companies without tender, one of them with links to Dom Cummings and a former leading official in the data law breaking Vote Leave.

I would say that's extraordinary but it isn't really, it's just another episode in the life of a chronically untrusworthy government.

https://bylinetimes.com/2020/04/22/palantir-coronavirus-contract-did-not-go-to-competitive-tender/

Exactly, and I forgot this last time (there is so much), Johnson still has questions to answer over his awarding contracts to his then girlfriend, and then withheld the Russia report from the public.

Leroy42 · 04-05-2020 06:52PM

theological wrote: »

The thing is it doesn't require trust. I can read the code and check out what it is doing before I install it on my phone.

Maybe you are able to tell from just reading the code that there are no back doors, no way that anything can be taken without your or others consent.

That is great, but a huge amount of the public will not have that ability and this trust becomes a major factor. And this government has done nothing to earn anyone trust.

They have continually looked to be as disingenuous as possible.

theological · 04-05-2020 06:58PM

Leroy42 wrote: »

Maybe you are able to tell from just reading the code that there are no back doors, no way that anything can be taken without your or others consent.

That is great, but a huge amount of the public will not have that ability and this trust becomes a major factor. And this government has done nothing to earn anyone trust.

They have continually looked to be as disingenuous as possible.

The "back doors" would also have to be present in the code in order to run on your phone.

Joe_ Public · 04-05-2020 07:03PM

Thing is, i would probably on balance download the app, but the thousands that wont, i totally understand them. Having Cummings even remotely linked to the initiative with his shady Vote Leave buddy is unforgivable, just raises red flags all over the place.

In other news, just over 62,000 people tested today. Not far off a 30% retest figure. Seem to be giving up with the worthless postal kits.

https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1257361821784322058?s=20

theological · 04-05-2020 07:13PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Thing is, i would probably on balance download the app, but the thousands that wont, i totally understand them. Having Cummings even remotely linked to the initiative with his shady Vote Leave buddy is unforgivable, just raises red flags all over the place.

In other news, just over 62,000 people tested today. Not far off a 30% retest figure. Seem to be giving up with the worthless postal kits.

https://twitter.com/DHSCgovuk/status/1257361821784322058?s=20

The figures are up to 9am on Monday morning. Meaning it is a testing figure for Sunday. I would expect this to be lower as fewer people are about for work. Also I guess that would have an impact on the delivery of home testing kits.

Joe_ Public · 04-05-2020 07:23PM

theological wrote: »

The figures are up to 9am on Monday morning. Meaning it is a testing figure for Sunday. I would expect this to be lower as fewer people are about for work. Also I guess that would have an impact on the delivery of home testing kits.

Testing figures, unlike fatalities, haven't been showing a weekend tail off afaik. But postal kits would be affected alright to be fair so probably likely we'll see the resumption of these virtually worthless items come midweek.

RobMc59 · 04-05-2020 07:30PM

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Testing figures, unlike fatalities, haven't been showing a weekend tail off afaik. But postal kits would be affected alright to be fair so probably likely we'll see the resumption of these virtually worthless items come midweek.

Are they the same tests causing controversy in Ireland?

Leroy42 · 04-05-2020 07:30PM

theological wrote: »

The "back doors" would also have to be present in the code in order to run on your phone.

I think you missed the point I was trying to make.

You may be able to read through the code and be satisfied but the vast majority of people will not. Therefore they need to trust the government.

Yet the government have given them no reason to trust them.

Gove, until a few months ago, didn't even think Johnson was cut out to be PM, stabbed him in the back, but now we are all supposed to believe that Gove is fully on board?

And the lies about the testing, and the death numbers, and the Russia Report, and Acuri.

If sufficient numbers to not take up the app then it has limited use. What numbers are the government aiming to achieve, by when and who will you blame if enough people do not sign up?

The UK response to Covid-19 [MOD WARNING 1ST POST]

Comments