Would you install and use an NHS Covid tracking app?

[Ratski83]

mygoldfishbowl said:

If this app relies on people being tested for the virus then it's pretty much gonna be useless, isn't it?

Yep. Are testing is currently behind such highly developed countries such as Iran and we have to accept PPE charity from the likes of Turkey, this app is guaranteed to be as useful as a chocolate fireguard.

Interestingly there was a good episode of The Simpsons on C4 yesterday when Bart finds a mobile phone and Marge and Homer start tracking him relentlessly and after a tip off from Lisa he attaches it to a bird and they follow it all the way to Peru. Very apt considering the times.

[juice]

Given they're intending to use BT, I wonder how they are proposing to deal with the increased risk of bluesnarfing and bluejacking ?

[bitchstewie]

It's good that 50% of respondents would do this.

But I'm baffled that almost 40% wouldn't.

To a point I can understand privacy concerns but some of the stuff on the thread is just tinfoil nonsense.

[djohnson]

I’d worry about the thing giving false positives. Most of my working life is spent in city centres and there’s potential to be ‘in contact’ with many many people. Can the app differentiate between someone who is genuinely in contact with me from those through the partition wall in the office block (I can see their Bluetooth, WiFi etc but in reality they’re in a different office)? Those walking past my closed office window? Those in the next car on the ring road? Those in the next train carriage, or even the train going the other way? My office has a bus station outside, what about all those thousands of people who pass my window each day on a bus?

I’d worry that I (and many others who work in busy areas) end up having to self isolate continually.

[p1esk]

voyds9 said:

Not only wouldn't I install it I have already turned my phone off and it sits idly on my desk and hasn't moved in the last 3 weeks.

I already don't trust them not to track it.

Given that I have had my mobile phone for at least the last 12 years - it is definitely not 'smart' - so the question seems irrelevant to me.

When they first appearerd mobile phones seemed like a very useful thing to have if we're out and about and some sort of emergency were to arise, but when I'm at home the thing is switched off and just sits on my desk.

I wouldn't be surprised to find that eventually we shall all be obliged to have a smart phone and being caught away from home without it being switched on will be a serious offence. Maybe not though; perhaps we'll all be chipped by then. I do wonder if mankind's headlong rush into more and more technology is actually going to prove a wise move: I have my doubts.

Of course many wonderful things have been done, and are being done, with technology, but I just don't think we have the wisdom to decide how much of it to adopt and apply, and in what ways to use it without creating new problems that would otherwise not have arisen.

Sorry, that's probably way out of line with popular thinking, but there you go. After all, I'm not sure it would be better if we were all to take the same view of things.

[wiggy001]

There are some crazy people on this thread who should probably speak to their GP tomorrow.

[bitchstewie]

wiggy001 said:

There are some crazy people on this thread who should probably speak to their GP tomorrow.

Using a landline.

[steveo3002]

i wouldn't install

but then my phone often thinks i'm somewhere i'm not , and apps crash the time so good luck with it working well

[pip t]

Zirconia said:

Having read an article suggesting some usual suspects are up to some old tricks with no transparency and data issue (could be resolved being open about it), withdrawing from the yes vote. Unable to change it. Requires total transparency and ways and means from gov.com on all privacy and data.

Do you have a link to what you read? Not that I’m doubting you, just interested as I haven’t seen anything suggesting that.

And I agree, this has to be transparent in order for people to have any trust in it. Given the specs of it and the intention to open source the code it seemed like they were doing a reasonably good job on this - but if there’s evidence they’re being sneaky that’s not good.

[pip t]

djohnson said:

I’d worry about the thing giving false positives. Most of my working life is spent in city centres and there’s potential to be ‘in contact’ with many many people. Can the app differentiate between someone who is genuinely in contact with me from those through the partition wall in the office block (I can see their Bluetooth, WiFi etc but in reality they’re in a different office)? Those walking past my closed office window? Those in the next car on the ring road? Those in the next train carriage, or even the train going the other way? My office has a bus station outside, what about all those thousands of people who pass my window each day on a bus?

I’d worry that I (and many others who work in busy areas) end up having to self isolate continually.

This is definitely a concern. There are ways and means of judging proximity using Bluetooth - signal strength and attenuation etc - but it’s not going to be 100% accurate. Also because it uses Bluetooth LE, rather than older forms or BT, any phone much over 5 years old won’t be able to use it, which is an issue.

[pip t]

juice said:

Given they're intending to use BT, I wonder how they are proposing to deal with the increased risk of bluesnarfing and bluejacking ?

Always a concern - but given that the vast majority wander round with Bluetooth turned on by default anyway, not sure this’ll make a huge difference to be honest.

[Zirconia]

pip t said:

Zirconia said:

Having read an article suggesting some usual suspects are up to some old tricks with no transparency and data issue (could be resolved being open about it), withdrawing from the yes vote. Unable to change it. Requires total transparency and ways and means from gov.com on all privacy and data.

Do you have a link to what you read? Not that I’m doubting you, just interested as I haven’t seen anything suggesting that.

And I agree, this has to be transparent in order for people to have any trust in it. Given the specs of it and the intention to open source the code it seemed like they were doing a reasonably good job on this - but if there’s evidence they’re being sneaky that’s not good.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/12/uk-government-using-confidential-patient-data-in-coronavirus-response

I feel I need to insert the usually apology now that used to be reserved for the daily wail.

[pequod]

cidered77 said:

pequod said:

cidered77 said:

yes we have enough capacity at the moment *with everyone at home creating probably the biggest single shock to our economy in living memory*.

and that's with at best 5% of the whole country affected. So how do we get the 70% or so you need for herd immunity?

This will be the only way - if they play the comms right not installing it gets as much backlash as people sunbathing in a park then we might be able to use this to get our lives back.

Even if you have an inbuilt distrust of government and/or likely tend to overplay your unreliance on technology.....

I don't use a 'smart' phone, I believe they are called, so I can't help with this survey whatever my distrust!

you know exactly what they are called -and you're posting on a forum on the internet, so the act isn't particulary convincing.

Curious? You accusing me of 'acting' isn't particularly friendly to an old person who doesn't have or use a smartphone is it? Do you believe everyone who posts on here uses a smartphone or am I misreading your reply to me?

I, of course, know what you youngsters laughingly call a 'smart' phone is modern parlance for a mobile telephonic and data communication device, perhaps you didn't realise I was being ironic?

[Jasandjules]

Most people who would benefit from it (elderly) will not have a phone or know how to use it - I live in a village with many elderly, few of them have moblie phones let alone smart phones or the knowledge to download this app and half don't even have the internet at home.......

[bloomen]

I'm a total battery miser and only two people have my number so most of the time it's in flight mode. I have also never, ever turned on bluetooth in my entire life. Not sure I'll be much use to the collective.

[pip t]

Zirconia said:

pip t said:

Zirconia said:

Having read an article suggesting some usual suspects are up to some old tricks with no transparency and data issue (could be resolved being open about it), withdrawing from the yes vote. Unable to change it. Requires total transparency and ways and means from gov.com on all privacy and data.

Do you have a link to what you read? Not that I’m doubting you, just interested as I haven’t seen anything suggesting that.

And I agree, this has to be transparent in order for people to have any trust in it. Given the specs of it and the intention to open source the code it seemed like they were doing a reasonably good job on this - but if there’s evidence they’re being sneaky that’s not good.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/12/uk-government-using-confidential-patient-data-in-coronavirus-response

I feel I need to insert the usually apology now that used to be reserved for the daily wail.

While that is definitely a concerning article, it doesn't actually refer to this system.

If this system is implemented as described - and that's always an 'if,' but currently there's no evidence to the contrary - the kind of data that article refers to simply wouldn't be generated to be shared.

No need to apologise - I don't agree with quite a lot of what The Guardian says these days, but their investigative journalism is still pretty top notch. It's their comment pieces that are frequently rather heavily biased.

[Zirconia]

More info.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52263244

[AstonZagato]

Jasandjules said:

Most people who would benefit from it (elderly) will not have a phone or know how to use it - I live in a village with many elderly, few of them have moblie phones let alone smart phones or the knowledge to download this app and half don't even have the internet at home.......

I suspect they fall into the category who should be self isolating regardless. It is the 20-60yo cohort, who need to get out to work who will benefit the most. And who should be careful around the 60+ cohort (so knowing your Covid risk is valuable).

[pip t]

Roofless Toothless said:

Well, I did say 'our' email addresses, not 'my'.

As far as the actual thread topic is concerned, I do not own a smartphone, so it is all pretty academic to me. I have been deaf for over 35 years, and rely on two hearing aids. I can't use the things unless on loudspeaker, so I have never bothered. I know many people feel as attached to these phones as they are to their right arms, but I just don't have a smartphone shaped gap in my life to fill, and I don't intend ever getting one.

Completely aside from the topic at hand, and obviously I completely respect your decision not to own a smart phone, but there are some extremely clever ways they can help people with hearing loss. Google particularly has done great work in creating a system that can provide captioning for user generated content (Eg if your family send you a video, your phone can provide captioning for it), and they're working on applying the same technology to live phone/video calling. That may be of interest? There's also ways that both Apple and Android phones can directly connect to hearing aids (Obviously depending on your hearing aid type). As I say, clearly if you're not interested in owning a smart phone that's entirely your prerogative, but there are ways they can help hearing loss.

[pip t]

Zirconia said:

More info.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52263244

Thanks. One thing that stands out to me from that article is:

Article said:

NHSX was not aware of this project beforehand, but now plans to integrate the technology into its own product.

The fact they'd already started creating the app and are now integrating the Apple/Google system doesn't fill me with confidence in it being implemented entirely as published by the tech companies. Plus the fact that the NHS may use data for 'care and research' - if it's implemented properly it doesn't generate that kind of data....

However the fact they're committed to open sourcing it does guard against there being anything sneaky in it I guess....

The yellow/ red alert system seems like it has potential in terms of differentiating between self diagnosed and confirmed cases, but leads to the question of what action are you supposed to take on receiving a 'yellow' alert? Are you still supposed to go down the full self isolation route? Because that would leave it wide open to abuse if you can self declare and cause others to have to quarantine on the basis of it...