Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CDC tracked millions of phones to see if Americans followed lockdown orders

vice.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 442 posts

Re: CDC tracked millions of phones to see if Americans followed lockdown orders

#251

Post by panny »

maxerickson wrote: post #248
panny wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me that sounds a bit like >It's not rape if you consent to sex but I slip off the condom when you aren't looking. If the government is explicitly not allowed to collect this data, then buying it is simply a different form of data collection.

Read closer. I didn't express a personal opinion on the topic, I expressed an opinion/assessment about how courts handle the topic. Like you can have a legal theory about something and it doesn't mean shit if courts don't accept it.

>I expressed an opinion/assessment about how courts handle the topic.

Sure, but the courts are the government too. Which boils down to

>The government has decided the government should have more power over you.

or maybe

>I'm altering the deal, pray I don't alter it any further.

Re: CDC tracked millions of phones to see if Americans followed lockdown orders

#253

Post by maxerickson »

panny wrote: post #251
maxerickson wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Read closer. I didn't express a personal opinion on the topic, I expressed an opinion/assessment about how courts handle the topic. Like you can have a legal theory about something and it doesn't mean shit if courts don't accept it.

>I expressed an opinion/assessment about how courts handle the topic. Sure, but the courts are the government too. Which boils down to >The government has decided the government should have more power over you. or maybe >I'm altering the deal, pray I don't alter it any further.

Can the government read the New York Times?

What if it mentions where someone was at a particular time?

Doing the same thing for millions of people is of course different, but not for the reason you are expressing.

Re: CDC tracked millions of phones to see if Americans followed lockdown orders

#254

Post by pstuart »

tomcam wrote: post #239
pstuart wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pro-vax, pro-science here. I respect him for trying to help our society in dealing with infectious disease but do not worship him (that's saved only for David Bowie). My take on anti-vaxxers is that they have a "religious" relationship to their belief system and therefor project their personal assumptions onto others.

I’m deeply troubled that Bowie worshipped him

Ha. No, that's coming from me. He was a Rock God after all.

Re: CDC tracked millions of phones to see if Americans followed lockdown orders

#255

Post by chaps »

jonathankoren wrote: post #172
chaps wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because data is used in understanding something related to health doesn't mean that it's "health data" in a legal, protected, or regulatory sense. Nor does it mean that they should have de facto access to the data without limitations. Hell, the closest thing I'm aware of that's close to it (at least under HIPAA) is the name or address of a hospital that a person's visited. Would you be okay if the CDC purchased…

Quoted post unavailable.

My problem is absolutely related to data privacy and I'm not sure why you think otherwise, let alone why you think I'm interested in spreading disease (seriously, what.). At a practical level, one of my bigger concerns is that they've very likely made it possible to FOIA for the location information they bought.

Re: CDC tracked millions of phones to see if Americans followed lockdown orders

#256

Post by jimmydorry »

mullingitover wrote: post #240
leereeves wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's definitely not orthogonal to how you live your life; their very purpose is to limit how you live your life in order to prevent/reduce behaviors that spread disease. For example, they issue quarantine orders.[1] People understand that is their mission. Some find it scary. Everyone has a different threshold at which they start to object to the CDC overriding people's freedom in the pursuit of disease control, but…

> their very purpose is to limit how you live your life Their purpose is to increase the overall duration of healthy life we have, both individually and in aggregate. Limiting how you live your life is, again, orthogonal to that. For example, how is their campaign to control mosquitos and eradicate malaria in the US limiting how you live your life?

I'm going to assume that you are discussing in good faith, as per the HackerNews commenting guidelines, and did not deliberately pick a specific CDC campaign as a strawman.

The CDC's campaign to control mosquitos and eradicate malaria in the US probably does not limit how people are living their lives, but ordering an immediate nationwide halt on evictions of any renter for nonpayment of rent would be an example of applying limitations on people.

Re: CDC tracked millions of phones to see if Americans followed lockdown orders

#257

Post by Izkata »

mullingitover wrote: post #170
version_five wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> CDC are the least scary people buying this data Most buyers probably just want to target advertising at me, or otherwise grab my attention. The CDC wants a say in how people live their lives and thinks they know better than individuals about risk tolerance and decisions. And they seem to think they can have unchecked power by invoking "science". Can someone name a scarrier entity that could be tracking you? I don't…

> The CDC wants a say in how people live their lives and thinks they know better than individuals about risk tolerance and decisions. Their charter is disease control . How you 'live your life' is orthogonal to that mission - they're responsible for stopping you from infecting other people with communicable diseases. That is also your own responsibility , and just because responsibilities aren't always things you wan…

That's their name, not their scope. Here's an example of what else they do:

https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/about/index.html

> In 1979, the U.S. Surgeon General identified violent behavior as a key public health priority. In 1980, CDC began studying patterns of violence. This effort grew into a national program to reduce the death and disability associated with injuries outside the workplace. In 1992, CDC established the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC) as the lead federal organization for violence prevention. The Division of Violence Prevention (DVP) is one of three divisions within NCIPC. DVP is focused on preventing violence and its consequences so that all people, families, and communities are safe, healthy, and free from violence.

Re: CDC tracked millions of phones to see if Americans followed lockdown orders

#258

Post by wwweston »

version_five wrote: post #100
samschooler wrote: post #2

See the issue here is that this data exists at all and it’s purchasable by any group. I feel like the CDC are the least scary people buying this data. And from the looks of it they used it for medical research, which if similar in style to other medical research is bound by boards and ethics committees. What we aren’t writing about in this article are the groups using this data Cambridge Analytica style to sway polit…

> CDC are the least scary people buying this data Most buyers probably just want to target advertising at me, or otherwise grab my attention. The CDC wants a say in how people live their lives and thinks they know better than individuals about risk tolerance and decisions. And they seem to think they can have unchecked power by invoking "science". Can someone name a scarrier entity that could be tracking you? I don't…

> The CDC wants a say in how people live their lives and thinks they know better than individuals about risk tolerance and decisions

The CDC primarily exists to address collective risk with collective decisions in the face of public health and especially infectious disease events where the dynamics are inevitably collective.

Sometimes collective decisions curb individual freedom -- like curbs literally do, along with a host of related automotive policies one could use as analogs. Criticizing the CDC for "wanting a say" is like criticizing any other area in which collective government wants a say: it's fine to talk about limits to what government should be able to require and what would constitute a compelling reason for doing so (and in fact, that's what citizens of a democratic republic should do), but speaking as if it's a threat to "want a say" in general is unbalanced.

> And they seem to think they can have unchecked power by invoking "science".

Whether they decide to make their decisions on the basis of science observation and study or not, no public institution in the United States has unchecked power, there are always avenues for feedback and change, especially if you have a point that other people find persuasive.

And personally, I'd prefer most institutions made their decisions informed by scientific efforts, which would make them accountable both to fellow professionals in their field and other democratic institutions.

Data's a part of scientific efforts.

Re: CDC tracked millions of phones to see if Americans followed lockdown orders

#259

Post by epgui »

jiveturkey wrote: post #146
iaw wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Given the virtually unlimited executive powers the CDC believes it has Care to elaborate? CDC has historically been an extremely powerful organization devoted to the safety of the US public.

Devoted to the safety of the public, but not necessarily to that of the individual. ref: Tuskegee They are a government institution, and not to be blindly trusted. They require oversight above and beyond what private institutions require. I'm not sure why you want to give them the benefit of the doubt here.

The public is a collection of individuals.

Re: CDC tracked millions of phones to see if Americans followed lockdown orders

#260

Post by loceng »

pstuart wrote: post #92
loceng wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I've yet to find any compelling evidence that says that vaccines do not work (in fact quite the contrary). Conversations with anti-vaxxers in my circle are no different than those of deep religious conviction -- they believe it because they believe it and nothing can change their mind. Conversely, I'm more than happy to change my mind if compelling evidence/reasoning presents itself. That's not happened yet. Now its…

I'm not going to waste my time with someone who puts begins with such an obvious strawman.

If you can spot your strawman in your very last sentence and admit to it then I'll engage with you genuinely and thoughtfully.

Post reply on HN