31–40 of 223 posts
Except that Google isn't doing that and said so.[1] [1] https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/13/google-says-its-not-p...
Except that Google isn't doing that and said so.[1] [1] https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/03/13/google-says-its-not-p...
Can you point out to me the statement where Google denies working on the web tool?
Found it strange that some parts of media decided to focus on the semantics of Google and Verily being different subsidiaries of Alphabet. This is an almost meaningless detail.
"Carolyn Wang, communications lead for Verily, told The Verge that the “triage website” was initially only going to be made available to health care workers instead of the general public. Now that it has been announced the way it was, however, anybody will be able to visit it, she said. But the tool will only be able to direct people to “pilot sites” for testing in the Bay Area, though Wang says Verily hopes to expand it beyond California “over time.”"
From https://www.theverge.com/2020/3/13/21179118/google-coronavir...
From this quote and the behavior of Google's communications team (whether Google or Verily), you can assume that Google/Verily were caught off guard by the announcement of Google's involvement. Whether it was Google's original intent or not, it seems Google is trying to make the best of the situation now.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because that would be an incredible violation of privacy and is probably illegal? I’m not even sure China does that.
I found this site about Singapore yesterday. This kind of detail would never fly in the US. But they do seem to have used it effectively to track the spread of the disease: https://co.vid19.sg/cases
The first thing that came to my mind is HIPAA (I know it's US only). There are more than enough details for each patient to figure out who they are. They list employer, when they traveled, family members, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of fucking course, China does that. Watch the videos on how they are dealing with it. There are several on YouTube. When you get in and out of a subway or a building or whatever you have to scan a QR code with WeChat. Otherwise, you're not allowed to proceed. They also take your temperature in all these places and if your temp is higher than normal they send you to a fever clinic, where they determine if you have the…
Can you link me one?
Flash green at the checkpoint and you're allowed through. If your app shows yellow or red -> checks and quarantine.
0: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/07/how-gl...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you point out to me the statement where Google denies working on the web tool?
A quick read of the article confirms that a google subsidiary IS MAKING A WEBSITE. Trump got all the details wrong as usual, but the main idea is true. That article just seems like its fishing for "trump bad" material.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would probably be bad PR for them to reveal the extent of their surveillance.
You can see a map of your location history at any time. It's heavily promoted in Maps.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you point out to me the statement where Google denies working on the web tool?
A quick read of the article confirms that a google subsidiary IS MAKING A WEBSITE. Trump got all the details wrong as usual, but the main idea is true. That article just seems like its fishing for "trump bad" material.
Found it strange that some parts of media decided to focus on the semantics of Google and Verily being different subsidiaries of Alphabet. This is an almost meaningless detail.
If Trump said he cured cancer, but the truth was that only a few strains were cured, these same people would literally be upset. This is getting worse than the Bush Derangement Syndrome and all the Obama hate/conspiracies.
And getting some details wrong is fine if you accept criticism with the goal of converging on being correct.
Trump rejects the framework of communicating in correct facts, relying on emotional platitudes instead.
Running with your example, it's as if Trump is boasting that he has cured cancer, because he knows someone who invested in a company that made a marginal improvement to treatment for one type. And then when asked for clarification, he doubles down on his blunt assertion while making fun of the questioner.
If you accept a leader as being an authority, then you're still reassured by this. Everything is under control, because he says so. But if you try to analyze the facts you're hearing to form an independent judgment, he's out to lunch. And it's extremely worrying to hear someone who is not in touch with reality insist that everything is fine, especially when that person is supposed to be responsible.