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

401–410 of 442 posts

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

#401

Post by Soapysmith »

standardUser wrote: post #326
listless wrote: post #284

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.

That is so wildly off the mark it is preposterous. State and local officials were almost entirely responsible for the actual implementation of pandemic response measures. And when various cities and states got tired of the pandemic (despite record deaths) they simply ignored the CDC.

It is kinda like saying well the church did not enact the crusades it was the various kings and sovereigns who did. Well yes, that is true, but the church through its messaging put it into motion.

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

#402

Post by epgui »

psyc wrote: post #351
epgui wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In this case, the goals of the public and of the individual are aligned.

A few of the best ways to lose your individual autonomy are to die or become ill or disabled.

Optimizing for as little of that as possible across society is a good thing for individual freedoms.

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

#403

Post by sfink »

zdragnar wrote: post #394
sfink wrote: post #320

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> If you want to maximize privacy here, then let's pass laws to prevent doctors from knowing the gender, age, and weight of any of their patients. > I am fine with my doctor knowing this about me. I am not fine with any doctor who does not see me as a patient knowing anything at all about me. I am ok with my doctor knowing there was a 12% chance that I broke curfew during a pandemic lockdown, given my zip code or wh…

> I am ok with my doctor knowing there was a 12% chance that I broke curfew during a pandemic lockdown, given my zip code or whatever I am asking this out of genuine curiosity: Why? What actionable information does that tell your doctor about you, specifically?

Because, at least in my opinion, doctors should be considering base rates carefully. If I come in with an unusual set of symptoms, then I don't want to be tested for something that is vanishingly unlikely and not tested for something that has an unusually high frequency of occurring given my specific situation (demographic, race, vaccination rates in the community I live in for diseases that can produce my symptoms, etc.)

Medicine should not be one size fits all when better relevant data are available.

Different but related: I personally use similar information to determine the risk of various behaviors. Going to a meeting in someone's house where people won't be masked? Not a big deal if the current rate of community infection is very low in my local community. Playdate for my kids with friends who I know are not vaccinated for measles or pertussis or anything else? Depends on whether those are going around—and if they are, then I'd like to know how many kids are unvaccinated whether or not they're lying about it. If there's a way to get that aggregate information.

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

#404

Post by jonathankoren »

chaps wrote: post #255
jonathankoren wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

The data couldnt be foiaed because it’s not the government’s. Anyway, someone could just buy it direct anyway.

This is why I don’t understand your concerns. You start off freaking out about the public health officials having widely available location data, and keep harping about the government, but never once focusing on the actual data collection by private entities. Come on. Do you really think Foursquare is HIPPA compliant?

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

#405

Post by scotuswroteus »

franga2000 wrote: post #369
niij wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That _should_ be their role, but unfortunately they overstepped. The CDC implemented an eviction moratorium for around a year (September 4, 2020 through August 26, 2021). That had very real, negative impact on landlords during that time. I doubt those effected would call it toothless. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2020/09/04/2020-19...

The CDC's role should 100% _not_ be just about informing people. They and equivalent agencies around the world should have the power to take drastic measures in cases like a pandemic. That's their whole point. It's like saying traffic cops should only give warnings. But also, semi-related: they implemented a policy to prevent people from becoming homeless during a global pandemic and it had a negative impact on the p…

Sorry if I ignore anyone who compares the authority CDC should have to that of a cop

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

#406

Post by mullingitover »

niij wrote: post #395
drekk wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those landlords should get a real job in that case. They chose to treat housing like a speculative asset and it didn't go their way. Makes zero sense to me that our pandemic response was about "keeping small businesses afloat" rather than keeping transmission low for a few weeks. I guess besides sacrificing grandma to the economy for $2 margaritas at Applebee's we should have evicted millions during winter so that la…

Stealing/nationalizing property, even for a year, results in higher costs to do business in the future due to the assumed risk. So I agree with you that this may have helped the single metric in the short term; there are long term consequences. That means as an individual you will either pay higher rent or be forced to buy. Many people would rather have the flexibility and no maintenance that renting provides.

> Stealing/nationalizing property, even for a year, results in higher costs to do business in the future due to the assumed risk.

It's a good thing that's not what they did, then. Making landlords wait to be paid for a limited time is not the same thing as "stealing," and furthermore there were billions upon billions in subsidies passed around to mitigate the effects of this very reasonable measure.

It's telling that the best we can come up with to criticize the CDC's actions is "won't someone think of the landlords."

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

#407

Post by niij »

mullingitover wrote: post #406
niij wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stealing/nationalizing property, even for a year, results in higher costs to do business in the future due to the assumed risk. So I agree with you that this may have helped the single metric in the short term; there are long term consequences. That means as an individual you will either pay higher rent or be forced to buy. Many people would rather have the flexibility and no maintenance that renting provides.

> Stealing/nationalizing property, even for a year, results in higher costs to do business in the future due to the assumed risk. It's a good thing that's not what they did , then. Making landlords wait to be paid for a limited time is not the same thing as "stealing," and furthermore there were billions upon billions in subsidies passed around to mitigate the effects of this very reasonable measure. It's telling tha…

> Making landlords wait to be paid for a limit time is not the same thing as "stealing,"

They weren't being paid, that's the whole issue. If they were then an eviction moratorium wouldn't have mattered.

> furthermore there were billions upon billions in subsidies passed around to mitigate the effects of this very reasonable measure

Are government subsidies to corporations something you're supporting here?

> It's telling that the best we can come up with to criticize the CDC's actions is "won't someone think of the landlords."

Property rights are fundamental to a capitalist, free, society. If you want an economic system where property rights are ignored or where the government wholesale manages the economy then just come out and say it.

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

#408

Post by briantakita »

Soapysmith wrote: post #400
sofixa wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the root of the problem was the pandemic.

No, the root of the problem was death.

The root of the problem is the technocrats in charge. This sh*tshow happened under their direction. People used to get fired (or worse) for doing a lousy job & spoiling the commons. Now they are given even more power, riches, & a ubiquitous voice in all matters.

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

#409

Post by retrac »

jerkstate wrote: post #40
LorenPechtel wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are animal hosts, we can't get rid of it.

Of course we can, the question is, at what cost?

I'm not sure we can, even if we try. At least not for any practical cost. Canada has been trying to curtail, and ideally eradicate, rabies from the wild for the last ~50 years. Rabid animals are systematically culled. There's an oral animal vaccine. There's an ongoing vaccination program where they scatter the vaccine all over the place in edible treat format. The ongoing cost of these programs is considerable, running to hundreds of millions of dollars.

And yet rabies has not been eliminated from the wild. Not by a long shot. The cumulative effect of these programs over the decades is to mostly eradicate it from inhabited areas in foxes, raccoons and other species which are prone to human interaction. Actual eradication of rabies in the wild in North America, is essentially unattainable, even if we scaled current programs up massively. Too many skunks slip through the net. Unless we're going to simply sterilize the outdoors, I'm really not sure we could eradicate animal reservoirs for COVID-19.

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

#410

Post by psyc »

epgui wrote: post #402
psyc wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In this case, the goals of the public and of the individual are aligned. A few of the best ways to lose your individual autonomy are to die or become ill or disabled. Optimizing for as little of that as possible across society is a good thing for individual freedoms.

It isn’t individualism unless the individual is determining their own goals, and deciding what’s best for themselves. As soon as you have policy deciding what the public good is, you’re no longer discussing what individualists mean by individual freedom, at all. You’re subordinating the individual to the public good. I’m not trying to invalidate your other points, I’m asking you to please not try to frame them as ‘individual freedom, actually.’ I can’t stand doublespeak.
Post reply on HN