Privacy concerns should be addressed as privacy concerns. Trust me, “location tracking won’t even work because cell data is imperfect” will not stand long because it will obviously work enough to win that argument quickly. (PS. I’ve been writing about threats to privacy forever).
-
-
Show this thread
-
Every other method, too, is imperfect, with significant false positives and negatives. Six feet distance is an estimate—depends where and dose. Antibody tests have ranges. Tests misdiagnose. Fever is not a consistent symptom, etc. Phone surveillance is not different.
Show this thread -
In sum, privacy concerns can only be addressed as privacy concerns, not behind any kind of “it won’t work” framework.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Man, I never thought I'd see everyone in New York wearing masks, either. But here we are. The threat of millions of deaths and an economic depression has a way of changing people's behavior, I guess!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Taiwan is the interesting model. Largely averted effects of the pandemic, and only 100 miles from China. They had GPS enforced quarantine but switched to Bluetooth bc of privacy concerns.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.