Singapore says contact tracing data may be used for criminal investigations • Hacker News Board

Re: Singapore says contact tracing data may be used for criminal investigations

#131

Post by ClumsyPilot » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 7:23 PM UTC

slg wrote: post #130

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its bizzare that you doubt it - you mist have been fortunate to never have been harmed by a faceless bureaucracy. There is an entire genre of kafkaesque literature, where the whole system is so broken that even top officials synpathetic to your plight cannot help you. There is 'computer says no' situation where a bank clerk wants to give you a mortgage, but cannot because the computer system flagged something, but wo…

The bureaucracy stops being faceless the moment you encounter a human. If the human is unwilling to help you, that is on that human. If that human is unable to help you, that is the human who put that obstacle in the bureaucracy. The bureaucracy isn't making any actions itself. To be clear, I am not defending governments, corporations, or bureaucracies. I am pointing out those things are too often used as a shield so…

Would you be able to force your company to make a donation of $100 to save someone's life? Like actually get a major corporation like Google to move the money out of their bank account as a regular rank-and-file developer? If not, are you evil, or is Google evil?

The system is often setup in such a way that the person who is setting the rules doesn't see their impact and doesn't even know you exist, and the person who sees your plight is powerless to help you. Cruel system can arise with no intention, just stupidity.

Re: Singapore says contact tracing data may be used for criminal investigations

#132

Post by jariel » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 9:20 PM UTC

half0wl wrote: post #33

jariel wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So general societal progress and their control of covid is evil? The 'tracking for criminal cases' is clearly a 'bad thing' but ... it's also legit democracy with excellent universal healthcare and rule of law. ... careful with the easy characterizations.

Any perceived "societal progress" comes at a (heavy) cost of personal liberties; the Singapore government have always "preferred" the former. > it's also legit democracy If your interpretation of a democracy boils down to mere voting rights and choice, then sure, it's legit. But I think we should also consider the trickle-down effects of having the same party in power ever since the government was formed. Your ethics…

You are saying that those voters who are making choices of their own free will - are dim? (There is no voter suppression, murder of journalists or opposition after all) And consistently vote against their own best interests? Rather an Orientalist view, no?

Re: Singapore says contact tracing data may be used for criminal investigations

#133

Post by tehlike » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 9:51 PM UTC

4ggr0 wrote: post #35

tehlike wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. It might be good now, but no guarantees that it will stay that way. Principle of least privilege and data should be the norm but sadly it never is.

And why the focus on governments? Is the same risk not present with private corporations?

it is a generic statement. applies to most things you can think of if not all.

Re: Singapore says contact tracing data may be used for criminal investigations

#134

Post by xboxnolifes » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 10:16 PM UTC

malka wrote: post #49

kasperni wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Not really. It might be good now, but no guarantees that it will stay that way. By that definition there really aren't any entities that you can trust. Including family, friends, etc.

You cannot compare individual, and abstract entities such as states. Humans feel empathy. States (and corporations) only follow interests.

I feel that it's more the fact that a single person is always the same person (physically) over their lifetime, while a state and corporation is a rotating door of people and philosophies. The same idea as how a Monarchy can be a fine government system until you get that one terrible king.

Re: Singapore says contact tracing data may be used for criminal investigations

#135

Post by slg » Mon, Jan 04, 2021, 10:28 PM UTC

ClumsyPilot wrote: post #131

slg wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bureaucracy stops being faceless the moment you encounter a human. If the human is unwilling to help you, that is on that human. If that human is unable to help you, that is the human who put that obstacle in the bureaucracy. The bureaucracy isn't making any actions itself. To be clear, I am not defending governments, corporations, or bureaucracies. I am pointing out those things are too often used as a shield so…

Would you be able to force your company to make a donation of $100 to save someone's life? Like actually get a major corporation like Google to move the money out of their bank account as a regular rank-and-file developer? If not, are you evil, or is Google evil? The system is often setup in such a way that the person who is setting the rules doesn't see their impact and doesn't even know you exist, and the person wh…

>Would you be able to force your company to make a donation of $100 to save someone's life?

Maybe it is because I work for a company that has a value measured in the singular billions rather than the singular trillions like Google, but the answer is yes. I could rather easily get $100 of company money to save a life. You are going to have to set the cost much higher than $100 before it gets to the point that I couldn't get that done myself or with the help of someone I already have a direct relationship with.

>The system is often setup in such a way that the person who is setting the rules doesn't see their impact and doesn't even know you exist, and the person who sees your plight is powerless to help you. Cruel system can arise with no intention, just stupidity.

Those rules are often setup specifically to give the people who see your plight an out for acting without empathy. That doesn't mean there is never an opportunity for them to give in to their empathy and bend some rules. It also doesn't mean that the person who set the rules is innocent or ignorant of the harm they did. They just absolve themselves of it through their own lack of empathy. It is not them committing these acts, it is "the company".

Re: Singapore says contact tracing data may be used for criminal investigations

#136

Post by avh02 » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 7:16 AM UTC

verroq wrote: post #84

gonehome wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “ If they can be forced to change whatever implementation they have by the government then it helps no one.” They can’t be easily forced to change the implementation and their implementation reduces the risk of privacy problems. It’s designed explicitly to be effective without increasing that risk and without giving the government any individual’s information. It’s worth reading the doc I linked.

And it’s a solution looking for a problem. No one wanted this. Not the people and not the government. It doesn’t solve my problem because I will not use such an app, period. It doesn’t solve the government’s objective of maximum data collection so they won’t use it. The very idea of privacy conscious contact tracing is an oxymoron.

You underestimate how important it is to (most, competent) governments to keep their citizens alive and how unprepared they were caught in this. This solution (if used) was better than flying blind and cost these governments nothing. It's not fair to pretend a government would not welcome contact tracing as-is if it helped provide a tool to stop the spread. Not everything a government does is out to surveil you, they have to still provide some other functions.

After a lid is on things though - yeah, maybe. Maybe they'll try to flip this, but not while their pants are down.

Re: Singapore says contact tracing data may be used for criminal investigations

#137

Post by avh02 » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 7:21 AM UTC

dirtyid wrote: post #86

gonehome wrote: post #56

One thing that drives me crazy about this is that Apple and Google partnered to come up with a brilliant Bluetooth solution to contact tracing right at the beginning of the pandemic. It was privacy first, well designed, and it works. It was hamstrung by being opt-in instead of opt-out, relying on state level cooperation and misunderstood by people who didn’t even attempt to try to understand it (including here on HN)…

Exposure notification is not contact tracing. Questionable if effective contact tracing on mass scale without privacy violation is possible. At least Singapore contact trace and enforcement chain worked. Worse, A&G hubris in their solution and lack of cooperation with governments that wanted a proper contact trace solution bordered on insolence has caused preventable deaths. The fact that two platform owners could pr…

With enough responsible people and critical mass, exposure notification and contact tracing are ideally equivalent at their objective. Unfortunately though, people aren't responsible

Re: Singapore says contact tracing data may be used for criminal investigations

#138

Post by verroq » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 12:14 PM UTC

avh02 wrote: post #136

verroq wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it’s a solution looking for a problem. No one wanted this. Not the people and not the government. It doesn’t solve my problem because I will not use such an app, period. It doesn’t solve the government’s objective of maximum data collection so they won’t use it. The very idea of privacy conscious contact tracing is an oxymoron.

You underestimate how important it is to (most, competent) governments to keep their citizens alive and how unprepared they were caught in this. This solution (if used) was better than flying blind and cost these governments nothing. It's not fair to pretend a government would not welcome contact tracing as-is if it helped provide a tool to stop the spread. Not everything a government does is out to surveil you, they…

Then why wasn’t it used? Surely all these governments all have heard of apple/google’s superior solution. Reality undermines this argument.

Re: Singapore says contact tracing data may be used for criminal investigations

#139

Post by avh02 » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 12:39 PM UTC

verroq wrote: post #138

avh02 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You underestimate how important it is to (most, competent) governments to keep their citizens alive and how unprepared they were caught in this. This solution (if used) was better than flying blind and cost these governments nothing. It's not fair to pretend a government would not welcome contact tracing as-is if it helped provide a tool to stop the spread. Not everything a government does is out to surveil you, they…

Then why wasn’t it used? Surely all these governments all have heard of apple/google’s superior solution. Reality undermines this argument.

some waited, some didn't. I can't pretend to know why.

My personal guess/opinion is that those governments who's only objective was to get people isolated on exposure would at least have leaned towards the apple/google solution when it became available. Those who had ulterior motives (or had already rolled something out) would be less likely to wait for it.

One surprise for me here is Norway's initial implementation, which it later re-evaluated[1], you'll also see (at least at that point in time) that Bahrain and Kuwait did not. Bahrain even turned it in to a game show.

Edit: just to add, you'd see for example a place like Australia looking in to the solution once available, last paragraph here[2] - my opinion is that these countries do not feel threatened by their general populace, thus don't feel the need to turn everything in to a mass surveillance tool if they don't need to

[1]: https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2020/06/bahrain-kuwai...

[2]: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-apps-t...

Re: Singapore says contact tracing data may be used for criminal investigations

#140

Post by hungryforcodes » Wed, Jan 06, 2021, 2:02 AM UTC

coldtea wrote: post #113

hagibborim wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This usage fits definitions a, b, and c. This very definition draws a distinction between a 'fallacy' and a 'logical fallacy'

> This usage fits definitions a, b, and c. No, it doesn't. Government: - "We will use data just for medical purposes" Government (later): - "Guess what, we lied/we recant: we will use them for other state purposes too". There's nothing fallacious in (a), (b) or (c) way about either statement or the whole situation.

It's a brilliant example of doublethink you did there.