Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy? • Hacker News Board

Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?

#11

Post by aplummer » Mon, Mar 23, 2020, 8:32 PM UTC

1996 wrote: post #5

Individual privacy is where I draw a line in the sand. I'm ready to do many things, but that does not include allowing geotracking, geofencing or any other restriction on the freedom of movement and freedom of assembly. The government can shut businesses, shut public parks and beaches, but what we do in our homes, clubs and other private properties is off limits.

> any other restriction on the freedom of movement and freedom of assembly.

> clubs and other private properties is off limits.

To give you the benefit of the doubt, you don’t mean that you refuse to have temporarily restricted movement during a pandemic?

Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?

#12

Post by turdnagel » Mon, Mar 23, 2020, 8:34 PM UTC

The only actors in the position to help here are the carriers and platform owners. Perhaps a joint venture between Apple and Google to hold each other accountable? I don't trust the carriers to get this right.

Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?

#13

Post by saagarjha » Mon, Mar 23, 2020, 8:34 PM UTC

RegnisGnaw wrote: post #10

saagarjha wrote: post #7

Summary: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1UGY07m8GNrUaj9bGRx07vDMccxT... Paper: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2003.08567.pdf It seems like the way this preserves privacy is that you only upload your location information once you're tested positive, where it is "redacted" (I have very little faith in this) and then sent to everyone else so they can check to see if they were in contact with you. It's better than mass surveilla…

Mandatory or optional? Will the government force me to upload if I am positive? Or can I choose not to?

Optional, presumably. Nobody is forcing you to install the app if it was mandatory anyways (and how would the app know you were positive?), so it makes little difference.

Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?

#14

Post by awinter-py » Mon, Mar 23, 2020, 8:35 PM UTC

RegnisGnaw wrote: post #9

If sharing your location is optional, then there will be people who opt out. Depending on how many people opt out, the data may be useless.

I'm not an epidemiologist, but partial contact tracing is probably better than none

especially if the goal is to slow not stop

Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?

#15

Post by __s » Mon, Mar 23, 2020, 8:35 PM UTC

How should one know which regions have health officials using this? Asking as a Canadian

Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?

#16

Post by cjbprime » Mon, Mar 23, 2020, 8:41 PM UTC

Singapore's doing contact tracing without any location data, and with contact between devices encrypted until needed for a contact disclosure. Seems like a better approach to me:

https://www.mobihealthnews.com/news/asia-pacific/singapore-g...

Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?

#17

Post by LordOfWolves » Mon, Mar 23, 2020, 8:55 PM UTC

Sadly, I do not see Private Kit reaching anywhere close to the critical mass required for it to be fully effective, unless all Americans are required to use it per a new federal mandate, which I cannot see becoming a reality given the incompetency clearly exhibited by one or more of our "leaders" over the past several days (if not much longer)..

Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?

#18

Post by ndiscussion » Mon, Mar 23, 2020, 8:57 PM UTC

aplummer wrote: post #11

1996 wrote: post #5

Individual privacy is where I draw a line in the sand. I'm ready to do many things, but that does not include allowing geotracking, geofencing or any other restriction on the freedom of movement and freedom of assembly. The government can shut businesses, shut public parks and beaches, but what we do in our homes, clubs and other private properties is off limits.

> any other restriction on the freedom of movement and freedom of assembly. > clubs and other private properties is off limits. To give you the benefit of the doubt, you don’t mean that you refuse to have temporarily restricted movement during a pandemic?

I believe that is what they refuse. I refuse it.

Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?

#19

Post by Dumblydorr » Mon, Mar 23, 2020, 8:58 PM UTC

Yes, By staying home, washing our hands, and not going out onto beaches and partying. Anyone found breaking the rules should be charged with biological assault.

Re: Private Kit: Can we slow the spread without giving up individual privacy?

#20

Post by perl4ever » Mon, Mar 23, 2020, 9:04 PM UTC

Dumblydorr wrote: post #19

Yes, By staying home, washing our hands, and not going out onto beaches and partying. Anyone found breaking the rules should be charged with biological assault.

It's being taken for granted that nearly everybody (Cuomo just said 80%) is going to get it, so it doesn't make sense to get angry at someone for increasing your risk of catching it. The efforts to slow the spread are about giving the healthcare system time to cope. So, yes, people are being antisocial if they don't follow the rules but it's not sane to treat it like you're personally being assaulted. This isn't ebola or HIV.