Note that *in particular* this implies that measures that just do contact tracing, while trying to keep location ambiguous or undetermined, are not sufficient. We need the maximum resolution data these devices are already broadcasting to advertisers, platform owners, the GRU, etc
-
Show this thread
-
The more general problem with privacy advocates' arguments against technical measures is that they are not being made in good faith. They have a desired conclusion ("this doesn't even work!") based on their policy preferences, and they fit their thinking to meet it.
2 replies 3 retweets 18 likesShow this thread -
I'd be very curious to hear from people in the epidemiological world whether a data stream that let them track long-distance travel by infected people, and generate a list of potential contacts based on even rough proximity data, would be useful in containing this disease
4 replies 2 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
There are all sorts of privacy arguments you can make for why we shouldn't do this kind of contact tracing. I'll fight you, but they're strong arguments! The technical arguments, however, are weaksauce. Anything that helps prune a list of potential contacts is better than nothing
2 replies 3 retweets 16 likesShow this thread -
A final point needs emphasis. The debate isn't how we use these technologies right now. There is no point to doing that until we've reached a state like Taiwan or South Korea, where it's back to tracking individual cases, and want to reopen the economy and resume normalish life
1 reply 2 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
The upshot is this: for the first time in human history, we have a working, automated real-time and retroactive location tracking tool for something like 80% of the US population. Do we make it part of our pandemic response, or strictly limit it to data brokers and advertisers?
5 replies 17 retweets 50 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @Pinboard
I think that 80% is interesting; I would guess that the most tracked ppl live in poverty & use Android phones full of spyware and the least are wealthy iOS users who have location svcs disabled and only have tower triangulation. How does it affect results to only track the poor?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @Pinboard
No, I just think the least tracked 20% is the most wealthy, and would generally guess that (quantity of currently available cell tracking data) is inversely correlated with wealth.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Here we go; the opposite is true. The richer you are, the likelier you are to own a smartphone. https://www.statista.com/statistics/195006/percentage-of-us-smartphone-owners-by-household-income/ …
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.