Live data from Hacker News

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

vice.com

351–360 of 442 posts

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

#351
post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

And? A collection of individuals isn’t an individual. That’s why we don’t say that collectivist societies are all about the individual. They aren’t. It’s the opposite.

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

#352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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? This describes every AdTech firm to a T, except that you’ve decided to direct your ire at a public health agency instead of them. The entire point…

There is an enormous difference between a corporation "nudging" me to buy something with an ad, and a government body using the full weight of its authority to force my compliance with their policies. I'm much more comfortable being nudged than I am being forced .

There is indeed an enormous difference, but I find this reasoning funny: when a government issues an order by fiat, there is no ambiguity with regards to your consent. You can either be on board or not; either way, there is a clear line between your opinion (and therefore what you will) and what is dictated to you.

This can’t be said for nudges: the entire point of an effective nudge is that you can’t be certain that you aren't acting of your own volition. That strikes me as a much worse state of affairs: not only are you controlled, but you don’t even know it!

TL;DR: two years after this entire fracas, it’s apparent that the government’s ability to force you to do anything w/r/t public health is mostly hollow. Meanwhile, the continence of our actions online seems to be increasingly shaky.

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

#353

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You better rip out your TPMS since those can be tracked. Same with anything that has bluetooth since those are widely tracked on highways for monitoring traffic flows. Oh and license plate readers, not sure how you block those. Can you live a cash only life as well since credit cards are obviously tracked. Do you own a home? Is it in your name or did you set up an LLC to purchase it? I'm not trying to be a jerk, just…

TPMS is fairly difficult to track. You need to be either very close (inches/feet) or have a very high gain antenna (which means you have to aim it, can't get signals from every direction) plus they don't transmit continuously.

I recommend getting a rtl-sdr and playing around with rtl_433. It will probably change your mind about needing to be very close to things.

Even with the small antenna these devices come with, I can pickup TPMS signals from the cars on the nearby streets, and that's with the antenna indoors.

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

#354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't even have the power to study gun violence.

They do, they choose not to. That they cannot by some law is a myth. Obama even called them out on it. Obama also had them author a massive study on all aspects of gun violence, but the results went quite against what the Dems wanted to claim, so it got pretty quiet again. What happened is they did publish some studies, and one was quite bad (to this day the author will not release the dataset, for example), but was…

When people reference the CDC not being able to study gun violence, they're referring to the Dickey Amendment of 1996. With the ambiguity in interpretation of "none of the funds made available for injury prevention and control at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) may be used to advocate or promote gun control" coupled with an earmark that shifted the exact amount the CDC had allocated to gun violence research to something unrelated, it ended up being, at minimum, a de facto ban on gun violence research (with a strongly implied threat of funding cuts for breaking the ban). There were exceptions to the de facto ban when they had marching orders from elsewhere, e.g. Obama's directive after Parkland.

That said, 2018 finally saw an interpretation of the Dickey Amendment codified that allowed, unambiguously, research into gun violence. And 2020 finally saw funding allocated for gun violence research. So, after over two decades, the CDC finally regained both the go ahead and the funding.

Given the above, I think it's still reasonable for people to use the shorthand of saying the CDC had been banned from doing gun violence research. Softening the language to be slightly less absolute would help, but I'd consider people to be in the ballpark of correct when they call it a ban on research. And it's also correct that that's no longer the case, thankfully.

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

#355

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…

the actual scary people would have the data locked up and be super secret about it. The non scary CDC employees would casually/accidentally leak it to other scary people because there is no reason to believe they are competent or care about security & privacy

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

#356
post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The CDC unilaterally ruled this country for the better part of 2 years. No checks. No balances. Now you could argue that the desperation of the situation calls for something more expedient than Democracy. But many people who supported the moves made by the CDC (including me) were equally horrified that it had as much power to do so.

Did you support them lying about mask effectiveness, destroying their credibility and leading to deaths? There's no question the CDC increased deaths by calling masks ineffective at the beginning of the pandemic. Their credibility never recovered, especially not when they are still flip flopping to this day (recommendations on masks oscillated by the week, often in response to public sentiment/political pressure -- n…

Documented reasoning behind that. Nobody said toilet paper was important and it became scarce. Imagine if they said masks were important. PPE would be impossible to get. Even worse than it already was. With stories like this coming to mind: https://www.cbsnews.com/chicago/news/illinois-comptrollers-o...

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

#357

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The event that is being referred to is probably when the CDC decided it had the authority to suspend evictions in the entire United States. It did not, as was decided by the Supreme Court.

So our government worked exactly as designed. Where is the problem?

I don't think an admonition to stop months after the damage is done is sufficient protection or remedy for government overstepping their powers, and I don't think you do either.

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

#358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 a…

I find it pretty encouraging that of all the possible examples of the CDC using its statutory authority you could think of, the example that comes to mind is that they took away a person's freedom to be evicted.

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

#359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wasn't a secret. It's literally on their website with the sources listed. What exactly is secret. The dashboard they have lists the source: https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#mobility Ctrl-F "the mobility metrics are"

Did you even read the article? They made a FOIA request and got the procurement documents which lists use cases such as "Examination of the effectiveness of public policy on [the] Navajo Nation" and monitoring "places of worship" both of which have extremely negative connotations. This sort of dataset gets used in all kinds of twisted ways that aren't limited to footnotes on cute graphs.

This is the problem with you Wikipedia Wise Men. The only knowledge you have is what you were told about. Your position is literally just the last “article” you read. All this shit is either in MMWRs or on preprint sites. It’s not “secret” beyond the basic fact that lots of hypotheses are studied constantly.

Here’s an example https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.02.20234989v...

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

#360
post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DoJ is not a research institution, and the CDC doesn't only study disease. They study all threats to public health, including smoking, heat waves, and bicycle accidents.

Honestly, this is one of the biggest issues I have with a government bureaucracy like the CDC. The government couldn't be bothered to study AIDS when it emerged in the US and actively denied its existence. But smoking? Do we really need to study it? It isn't even a disease. The states signed the Master Settlement Agreement. I feel like that should be the last time the government ever brings it up or spends another do…

> The government couldn't be bothered to study AIDS when it emerged in the US and actively denied its existence... But smoking?

Would it help to learn that the CDC researched AIDS extensively in the very early 1980s (as well as one small study from 1978-1984)? That they tracked the spread of AIDS worldwide during that time, and were the first to identify blood-transfustions as a vector for infection. That in 1982/1983 they were issuing guidance for dealing with suspected cases - 2 years before there was a test. That the CDC hosted the first international symposium on AIDS in 1985?

The solution there is not to get information from the president, but from the experts.

Smoking was something they started researching after they were granted more investigative powers in 1987 and 1992 bringing their scope beyond "disease" to "health research". And messaging. AFAIK, most research they do on smoking is on smoking cessation programs and the efficacy of anti-smoking measures. Well, and thanks to vaping, a lot on the health effects of that.

Post reply on HN