COVID19 Tracking App - would you use one? [Archive]

markharrison

17th April 2020, 09:54 PM

As the technique has been described (and I am a software engineer and have been for a reallllllly long time) and the data that has been described as going to be recorded; my answer is yes.

Does this mean that this data could not be misused? No. I can think of a couple of ways this could be misused. However, the actors would have to have sufficient motivation and significant resources. Pretty much a state actor (like the No Such Agency) or a third party funded and resourced by a state actor.

Furthermore, they still need to get the data recorded on your device. If that data is stored encrypted, that data will be useless (for any period of time that the data is meaningful) if encryption is done properly.

If a state actor was that interested in my movements; they really would not need to go to this trouble.

As a rule I am sceptical of the conservative parties of Australia. This is not something I am too concerned about (as opposed to not using it) because -- and here is the real kicker:

Nobody has yet made a vaccine for any coronavirus. Nobody.

An engineering solution to track and trace to minimise and manage risk will almost certainly be available before a vaccine can be created; assuming a vaccine is even possible.

People (myself included) are very supportive of the current program. However, there will be a point where that support will end for a significant portion of the population. Then?...

A Duke

17th April 2020, 10:38 PM

Hi,
I do not own mobile phone and have no reason to want one, so there for my answer is NO!

Regards

ian

18th April 2020, 07:26 AM

I do not own mobile phone and have no reason to want one, so there for my answer is NO!
Try this thought experiment

You don't own a Covid-19 app enabled mobile phone -- result you can't leave your house for any reason.

A pretty good way to "encourage" you to obtain a mobile phone.

ian

18th April 2020, 07:29 AM

As the technique has been described (and I am a software engineer and have been for a reallllllly long time) and the data that has been described as going to be recorded; my answer is yes.

Does this mean that this data could not be misused? No. I can think of a couple of ways this could be misused. However, the actors would have to have sufficient motivation and significant resources. Pretty much a state actor (like the No Such Agency) or a third party funded and resourced by a state actor.

Furthermore, they still need to get the data recorded on your device. If that data is stored encrypted, that data will be useless (for any period of time that the data is meaningful) if encryption is done properly.
Not sure if the University of Newcastle counts as a state actor, or one funded and resourced by a state actor
Outrage as University of Newcastle to track student attendance using mobile phones - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-04/newcastle-university-tracking-student-attendance-through-mobile/11915502)

Beardy

18th April 2020, 08:34 AM

Like you'd trust anything promoted by Stuart 'my bad' Robert or Peter 'I stopped the boats (but not this one that actually mattered)' Dutton.

I would not make a decision on this based on your own personal political persuasions. Whatever the gubberment of the day is will use the information in the same manor

Fuzzie

18th April 2020, 09:17 AM

An app is predicated on the assumption we are all smart phone carrying persons at all times. This may be true for millennials but my greatest usage of a mobile is to receive security codes when I'm seated in front of a PC doing stuff online. I never bother taking a mobile on a morning walk down the beach for instance which is often the most crowded location I am most days and the place I am most likely to be bumped into or have sweat blobs flung at me by some inconsiderate passing jogger. Cyclists and joggers always seem to believe they have the right of way on the walking tracks.

Beardy

18th April 2020, 10:08 AM

Fuzzie

18th April 2020, 11:03 AM

Have a look around you on your morning walk and you will see you are now very much in a minority group

Not around here. Only a minority of joggers and virtually no surfers are phone equipped, if they are carrying it's more likely to be a gopro! I'd say maybe only 50% of early morning walkers are visibly carrying phones.

Drillit

18th April 2020, 11:15 AM

Yes.

Skew ChiDAMN!!

18th April 2020, 11:40 AM

I'm another who says NO. The idea is good, but it'd establish a precedent for future, more dubious implementations.

Try this thought experiment

You don't own a Covid-19 app enabled mobile phone -- result you can't leave your house for any reason.

A pretty good way to "encourage" you to obtain a mobile phone.

Try this thought experiment.

You don't own a mobile phone, let alone a Covid-19 enabled one, because since the retirement of 2G it's as useless as tits on a bull... there's no coverage in your area for quite a few km's in any direction.

Such a housing restriction'd be a pretty good way to "encourage" you to move into an area of greater population density. :rolleyes:

markharrison

18th April 2020, 12:28 PM

Not sure if the University of Newcastle counts as a state actor, or one funded and resourced by a state actor
Outrage as University of Newcastle to track student attendance using mobile phones - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-04/newcastle-university-tracking-student-attendance-through-mobile/11915502)

Different end-goal. Totally different technique. And it is optional.

My assessment of the merits of this is based on the described technical detail proposed. Not what other organisations have done, nor what other techniques could be used.

The UK is proposing something I would be opposed to. Centralised collection of data in real time. That is an Orwellian nightmare! The worst part is that they would be swamped with useless data that would make the job of tracing orders of magnitude more difficult just because of the sheer volume of data.

BobL

26th April 2020, 03:18 PM

COVID tracker app is out but according to those who have downloaded it and tried to use it it is currently not possible to register the users phone numbers.

Another thing I mentioned in another thread is that on iPhones it only works if the mobile is unlocked because WiFi is disabled when the mobile is locked. Given that ~45% of mobiles in Oz are iPhones that basically wipes out 45% of users.

I guess it's about what we come to expect?

{EDIT}
Yeah sorry that should be Bluetooth.
App was made available at midday butt registration is not available until later today.

Also iPhone users are some 55% of all mobiles in Australia.
The instructions for iPhone users are you have to leave your phone unlocked at all times for the app to work.. Not very happy about that

Fuzzie

26th April 2020, 03:28 PM

Doesn't the app rely on Bluetooth not WiFi? Locked (Android) phones still register by BT in cars, maybe not Iphones?

grantoboy

26th April 2020, 03:39 PM

Doesn't the app rely on Bluetooth not WiFi? Locked (Android) phones still register by BT in cars, maybe not Iphones?The Bluetooth would need to connect to something, wifi and cellular would allow it to "phone home" to keep your locations updated.

I would assume on an iPhone the app would just update your location once the phone is unlocked.

Also it may run in the background with the gps but only update when you unlock (sends your locations that it has cached)

I use tracking apps for my home automation system and motorbike riding but we are all on Android and have no issues.

code4pay

26th April 2020, 04:51 PM

The Bluetooth would need to connect to something, wifi and cellular would allow it to "phone home" to keep your locations updated.

I would assume on an iPhone the app would just update your location once the phone is unlocked.

Also it may run in the background with the gps but only update when you unlock (sends your locations that it has cached)

I use tracking apps for my home automation system and motorbike riding but we are all on Android and have no issues.I don't think it needs your location, your blue tooth is always pinging to see if it can connect to a device. The other phones see the ping and store the unique identifier. Now if the other phones user gets covid they can list all the unique blue tooth it has seen in a certain time period. The apps must register the blue tooth unique id to username somewhere so all those users can then be contacted.

Sent from my SM-A505YN using Tapatalk

Fuzzie

26th April 2020, 04:52 PM

I admit I am just going by what I have understood by a cursory reading of what has been said about the app in the media. The app is not tracking where you have been just who you have been in proximity with. There is no need to gather any location information. If the app is just pinging surrounding bluetooth devices to see if it gets a reply then it logs the id of the bluetooth device. Later on if the medical people need to ascertain who you have been near to trace covid19 contacts they would download the history from your phone and the bluetooth contacts would be extracted and matched up to a database of other peoples phones who have also downloaded the app. Nobody knows who those people are without the database of registered users or indeed where you were when you were near them.

grantoboy

26th April 2020, 05:03 PM

I don't think it needs your location, your blue tooth is always pinging to see if it can connect to a device. The other phones see the ping and store the unique identifier. Now if the other phones user gets covid they can list all the unique blue tooth it has seen in a certain time period. The apps must register the blue tooth unique id to username somewhere so all those users can then be contacted.

Sent from my SM-A505YN using TapatalkNever looked at it this way.

So the app makes my Bluetooth constantly broadcast, this will have a negative effect on the battery life.

I can't seem to find it in the app store to see what permissions it require.

BobL

26th April 2020, 05:12 PM

Yeah there's no time or location data collected just phone numbers.

I was thinking of using the app but I'm not prepared to leave my phone unlocked all the time. Besides, apart from taking the dogs down the park every morning and sitting in the middle of 10 empty acres while throwing the ball for the dogs, SWMBO won't let me go into places like shops with strangers in them.

grantoboy

26th April 2020, 05:12 PM

Found it and you are correct it is Bluetooth only.

There goes tho people who have Bluetooth turned off https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200426/688af2b7c8857f325b8863ef56982df9.jpg

grantoboy

26th April 2020, 05:16 PM

Just tried to sign up but can't get pasted the register phone number screen for my activation pin.

Why doesn't our government learn

BobL

26th April 2020, 05:20 PM

Never looked at it this way.

So the app makes my Bluetooth constantly broadcast, this will have a negative effect on the battery life.

Not constantly - it very briefly (seconds) sniffs for nearby users periodically eg every few minutes and if it encounters the same phone number within 15 minutes period it records it.

I can't seem to find it in the app store to see what permissions it require.

Search for COVIDsafe - its there but you can't register just yet.

BobL

26th April 2020, 05:48 PM

Registration is opening at 6pm EST.

grantoboy

26th April 2020, 05:50 PM

Registration is opening at 6pm EST.Cheers will give it another go after 6

markharrison

26th April 2020, 09:52 PM

We have installed it on our phones.

I have read the privacy statement in full. Based on the disclosed information, I have a very good understanding of how it works and I am comfortable with the disclosed method. The government has said that this will be open-sourced and if they follow through on that, I will be looking closely at it to see if it is what is says on the tin.

Until that is released, I will also be following up with my local MP to ensure that open-sourcing is followed through on.

As I said in my earlier post; I have solid reasons for not trusting this government on their past performance (robo-debt, for one!) and I am sure there are many others that have similar concerns. If their goto move wasn't always the mean'n'tricky one, this would have been easier to swallow.

Still, I am just going to suck it up and trust them this much. If it turns out in the future they were not worthy of my trust; that is on them. In the meantime without a viable medical solution; this is the best we can do.

markharrison

26th April 2020, 10:21 PM

Never looked at it this way.

So the app makes my Bluetooth constantly broadcast, this will have a negative effect on the battery life.

I can't seem to find it in the app store to see what permissions it require.

As I understand this; it uses Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE) which is what the name implies. This makes sense to me. You are not interested in long range so BLE would be the best tool for this.

All iPhones have supported BLE since the iPhone 4s. Android phones probably from a similar period but that would depend on vendor and model.

I will have a better idea of energy usage in 24 hours.

grantoboy

27th April 2020, 02:24 AM

Appears it does a bluetooth search/ping every set unknown interval (under 15mins I am assuming) This will have a better battery life than a constant search but will still have an effect.

My phone can handle two bluetooth connections at once, wonder how it will handle this if I am using both channels on connected device already (ie my watch and headphones)

riverbuilder

27th April 2020, 07:48 AM

No. There’s already plenty of ways people who want to can track your movements and associations. I have a colleague who got involved with a lady of Chinese origin, who had contacts in the chinese military and other agencies. Now, when he tried to sever contact with her, she has someone over there tracking EVERYTHING on his phone, and sending it back to her. I received calls on my own private landline number( which he has on his phone) from a person with chinese accent, asking if I had seen him, etc,etc. I’m glad that there’s no mobile phone reception here at my house, it makes me feel a little bit better knowing people who want to, can’t. Of course that all changes when I drive downriver and into reception near the wharf, and civilisation.

Glider

27th April 2020, 08:01 AM

I think the poll results may be skewed by the use of the word "tracking" which implies knowing where you are and where you've been. It's not a tracking device. It's a proximity app which is able to reveal everyone with whom you've been in contact who has a mobile with Bluetooth activated when yours is also active. I'm unsure whether the Bluetooth contacts need to have the COVID Safe app downloaded also.

Initially I thought No Way until I learned the details, realised that Bluetooth had to be activated, I had to have the phone with me; and last but not least my mobiles clap out every few years and the new one wouldn't have the app loaded.

We've given up so many freedoms to fight this thing. Google and the rest know so much about us already via all the "free" software we use daily. The government has access to our metadata as well, whatever that is. My CCleaner Professional app deletes >1000 trackers every week.

I decided it would be not only in my personal interest to download it, it's in my community's best interest. I want to know if I've been in contact with someone with the lurgy for my family's sake as well as my own.

Besides that, I see myself as a team player (as long as I'm captain).

mick :)

BobL

27th April 2020, 10:27 AM

Iphone issues with this app are sort of explained here
COVIDSafe's effectiveness on iPhone in question as Government releases coronavirus contact tracing app - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-04-26/coronavirus-tracing-app-covidsafe-apple-iphone-covid-19/12187448)

In summary
"iPhone users may well give the app a go, but when they realise how fast the battery drains, they will quickly uninstall the app as it will inhibit the rest of their productivity on the device,"
Apparently Apple are working on a fix - not sure what this means but its probably going to be in the in the next IOS update - either way it leaves 56% of australian mobile users as less likely users.

I'm not downloading it until its gets sorted out as my battery life is not that good to begin with. BTW that does not necessarily mean I will use it.

grantoboy

27th April 2020, 10:52 AM

Chris Parks

27th April 2020, 12:37 PM

doug3030

27th April 2020, 01:13 PM

Please remember to vote - most members are unlikely to read the posts and more likely to look at the results

I will not vote as none of the options come anywhere close to why I would or would not use the app.

Like almost every poll I ever see the choices are very restrictive and aimed to only allow responses that appeal to the poll creator, or possibly inadvertently exclude alternatives that had never occurred to the creator.

Either way responding to a poll is likely to create an expression of an opinion that is not truly indicative of the thoughts of the respondent.

BobL

27th April 2020, 01:52 PM

I will not vote as none of the options come anywhere close to why I would or would not use the app.

Like almost every poll I ever see the choices are very restrictive and aimed to only allow responses that appeal to the poll creator, or possibly inadvertently exclude alternatives that had never occurred to the creator.

Either way responding to a poll is likely to create an expression of an opinion that is not truly indicative of the thoughts of the respondent.

Thats what I say to myself every time I go to vote, but at least these forums provide a test box that enable members to express a different point of view.

FWIW I don't particularly care about the result - it was just a vehicle for discussion and I thought making it some sort of a poll might make it a bit more interesting.

And of course unlike a ballot box you can always create your own poll :D

markharrison

27th April 2020, 04:15 PM

markharrison

27th April 2020, 04:42 PM

I'm not going to address this to anyone in particular. You know who you are.

If you don't understand something, it does not ipso facto mean it is evil. I have only a tiny understanding of how vaccines work yet I go and have vaccinations. I have never had polio, diphtheria and all the other things I have had vaccinations for, and those diseases were a problem when I was a lad.

In 1982, I didn't have an influenza vaccination (I can't even remember if that was a thing then) but I had influenza. And I was very ill. In hospital with double pneumonia ill. Influenza killed a lot of Australians that year.

Similarly with technology. Most of us are carrying around devices in our pockets that were science fiction not that long ago. You probably don't understand how they work and if I tried to explain it to you, your eyes would glaze over.

At least one person outside of the government has already decompiled (that's a technical term) the Android application from the Google App Store and basically confirmed what has been disclosed by the government. You can read about it in gory technical detail in this Twitter thread: https://twitter.com/matthewrdev/status/1254336105203200000?fbclid=IwAR2tXDAHz9LDmz18H9rJArtMPhV6vwSQ4BlT8JMOn4MmniC5gOhzJXCzBqI

If you read that and have questions, I will do my best to answer them for you.

The iPhone app is not as easy to decompile and we will have to wait for the government to provide the source code. I read this morning in the Guardian's live blog that this has been promised within two weeks. My local MP has not yet responded to me (not that I expected him to) so that is second-hand information.

There was someone earlier suggesting that Android was requesting access to GPS. That question is specifically addressed in that Twitter thread. Apparently this is feature of Android and it annoys developers a lot. I can't speak directly to that topic but if requested, I can read more on that and get back to you with a deeper explanation.

Decompilation: This is a process of returning the binary code that a computer understands into its source (human readable) form. This is not always possible due to the way different platforms work.

Glider

27th April 2020, 10:30 PM

I think the naysayers might change their view if they're unlucky enough to become infected; to say nothing of the people they might infect.

mick

doug3030

27th April 2020, 10:37 PM

I think the naysayers might change their view if they're unlucky enough to become infected; to say nothing of the people they might infect.

I didn't think anyone was saying that if you are using the app you are guaranteed not to get infected. As I understand it if only 40% of people take up the app the chances would be 60% that, if infected, you would be infected by someone without the app. Therefore you would not be notified promptly once your infector got symptoms.

Glider

27th April 2020, 11:02 PM

I didn't think anyone was saying that if you are using the app you are guaranteed not to get infected.

Nor did I say that either. The greater the number of people with the app, the faster contacts can be identified, informed and isolated. I value my privacy as well as the next man but it doesn't supersede the health of my loved ones. If I had been in contact with someone who fell ill, I'd want to know as soon as possible that I presented a risk to others and the hell with my 21st century worries about privacy. I sometimes wonder if we're becoming a fearful people like the Americans.

mick

doug3030

27th April 2020, 11:14 PM

Nor did I say that either. The greater the number of people with the app, the faster contacts can be identified, informed and isolated. I value my privacy as well as the next man but it doesn't supersede the health of my loved ones. If I had been in contact with someone who fell ill, I'd want to know as soon as possible that I presented a risk to others and the hell with my 21st century worries about privacy. I sometimes wonder if we're becoming a fearful people like the Americans.

Mick, I was not talking about privacy issues. I have location turned on on my phone and once a month I get a nice little google maps diagram of everywhere I went every day of the previous month. It comes in real handy for filling in my travelling expenses claims for DVA. I don't care if they find out who I stopped and talked to for 15 minutes. I don't even care if they know where we talked or what we talked about. I have nothing to hide. The Government knows more about me than I know myself.

What does bother me is that IF I get infected chances are greater than 50-50 that it will be from someone without the app or someone that I was close to for less than 15 minutes and I will not get a notification. Same applies for anyone who I might subsequently infect.

I know that when you go fishing you can't expect to catch all the fish and all that, but the whole system seems pretty hit-and-miss, yet they are talking about being able to ease social distancing restrictions based on an app that will miss more than it will get.

BobL

28th April 2020, 12:35 AM

In principle I'm not opposed to the App but I had a bit of a think about how many people I have had contact with in the past 2 weeks, and how many of those have been for more than 15 minutes and it turns out to be 2. My nephew when we did Grandmas eaves job, and one of my Bros who came around for a coffee but he sat >3m away from us on the front veranda.

The last time I was in a large group most of whom I did not know was March 11 (I do keep a sort of a diary/calendar) while doing a dust consult at a large mens shed. I was super nervous at the large number of people round me and I'm not going to do any more of these for some time.

I don't work and we've never been that social so we rarely "went out", pre COVID. We did drop some easter eggs off on my my son's front door mat just before Easter and waved hello through the front window - 2 mins max. My son and his family have agreed to not being in the same room for the foreseeable future.

We do online grocery shopping/purchasing or I drive and SWMBO goes into the shops.
My next specialist checkup is by Skype.

What does bother me is that IF I get infected chances are greater than 50-50 that it will be from someone without the app or someone that I was close to for less than 15 minutes and I will not get a notification. Same applies for anyone who I might subsequently infect.

I agree, the 15 minute issue is a real weakness with the app for me as I've generally avoided crowds/people for most of my life so I'm now quite good at avoiding them and was already keeping contacts ASAP. COVID distancing just gives me an opportunity to do this even more. However, this means the majority of my interactions with people are usually much less than 15 minutes, and some like blood tests are very close contact, so I do wear a mask - for blood tests i wear a P2.

During the last 2 weeks;
I got my flu shot - arrived at surgery and had to stay in car and call surgery. Doc came out and gave me the shot through open car window max 10s close contact.
I've taken one of the dogs to vet several times - same thing. Arrived, called, wait by door for Vet nurse to come out and take dog. I wait in car and we did the consult over the phone. Nurse came out and handed dog back, I wave pay pass over the machine to pay, 10s contact.
Dropped around to the mens shed to pick up a long ladder - two other persons there to give me a hand to put it on roof rack, 3m or more separation at all times, but 2 minutes contact at most. Same at drop off.
Went to bakery at 7:45 am - only guy on front counter around, so in and out real quick - 30s contact at most.
Same with Kebab shop. 15 secs contact to place order - wait outside in car and then 10s to pick up at most.
Cooked chook shop stop is a drive thru.
I have regular Blood tests - arrive, hand over my request and wait outside. Called in when ready, 5 minutes tops - all done.
Saw neighbours and a relative at the park several times - kept 3m away but maybe 2 minute contact each at most.

None of these contacts would be picked up by the app, lucky I have a fair memory - I think I will do the NZ thing and write these down - it sounds like this will be much more effective for me than the app. Given I will be writing these down I might as well write down the 15minute ones as well, especially as I don't always take my phone with me when I go out, and often I have it switched off or the battery has run out. I will keep the list of all my contacts on the mobile and hand it over to them if and when they ask.

Even though WA now has a social gathering max of 10 people, we're not planning to avail ourselves of this in the next few months.

Glider

28th April 2020, 06:46 AM

What does bother me is that IF I get infected chances are greater than 50-50 that it will be from someone without the app or someone that I was close to for less than 15 minutes and I will not get a notification. Same applies for anyone who I might subsequently infect.

Fair enough, Doug. It certainly will be hit and miss, but it's better than we've got now where our tax is paying people to ask every person who gets crook to try and remember everyone with whom they came into contact in the last two weeks and then ring all those people to warn them.

Like BobL, the only living being I've come close to in the last fortnight is a heifer which got into the yard and wiped its scouring bum on the door of my ute. But I've still downloaded the app.

Stay safe, dig.

mick

poundy

28th April 2020, 08:58 AM

is a heifer which got into the yard and wiped its scouring bum on the door of my ute. But I've still downloaded the app.
And I hope you convinced the heifer to do the same as well!

doug3030

28th April 2020, 09:37 AM

Fair enough, Doug. It certainly will be hit and miss, but it's better than we've got now where our tax is paying people to ask every person who gets crook to try and remember everyone with whom they came into contact in the last two weeks and then ring all those people to warn them.

I will explain why I will not download the app.

The government says that the app "will work" if 40% of the population uses it. Think about what the government means by "will work".

Do you think for a minute that they mean it will save you and me from Covid-19? I don't think so. That is what my definition of "will work" would be.

Their definition of "will work" is that it will provide them with statistics, random sample effectively, of how the infection is spreading and how effective various measures are controlling it. They are asserting that this will give them enough data at 40% usage to make those assessments and then relax social distancing or other countermeasures so that the economy will pick up. That's what the Government means by "will work".

With the app missing more cases than it gets I feel that doing this would put individuals in harms way. So I won't download the app so I will not be counted as part of the 40% who, in effect, vote for this to happen by downloading the app. I am effectively voting against throwing people under the bus in favor of profit.I believe this could just as easily trigger a second wave of Covid-19 as benefit us. Singapore used an app when they were doing well and now look at them.

Governments of all colors are very good at dressing things up as something they aren't and all the sheeple just follow on blindly without giving it proper thought. They don't call him Scotty From Marketing for nothing.

BobL

28th April 2020, 09:45 AM

Fake COVIDsafe SMS messages appearing.

472592
472593

pintek

28th April 2020, 10:52 AM

Do you think for a minute that they mean it will save you and me from Covid-19? I don't think so. That is what my definition of "will work" would be.

Could not agree more with this statement. Firmly believe that this app will be for statistical data with no real world affect on the spread of the virus.

BobL

28th April 2020, 10:58 AM

I will explain why I will not download the app.

The government says that the app "will work" if 40% of the population uses it. Think about what the government means by "will work".

The CMO yesterday defined pretty clearly what "works" means yesterday.

One aspect he described is it "automates largely what is done already, so it should save as much work as what the uptake and active use achieves".

There are somewhere around 7000 tracing staff working on locating contacts of infectees.
If 10% of the people use COVID safe it will save ~700 staff, so 700 x $1500 a week = or $105,000 a week, if 50% use it will save 50% of staff or $525,000 a week. Over 6 months that $136 million of taxpayers money. I doubt it will be that much but even if it saves a few $$ its better than nothing. These are his arguments not mine.

In terms of practical individual effectiveness this will vary enormously from individual to individual.

For an old farts like me (dare I say US?) who have very little >15 min contacts with unknown persons it won't matter much or at all so it won't matter much if we download the app. Like I said in my post above I ended up with about 1 >15 minute contact per week and I make it my business to know who I make contact with

For a 20 something (I'm picking on this age group because they have the highest infection rates) flighty, social butterfly type who daily commutes of public transport, works in place with large numbers of people and regularly "drops in" to see mates etc these people may end up with dozens of >15 minute contacts per week. The added benefit for these people is they will often make >15min "unknown" contacts which is where the apps should come be useful in tracing them or the unknowns.

I'm more interested in my personal close, <15 min close contacts, like the blood test I am going for this morning. If the phlebotomist is infected, even if she is running the app that won't help me because the blood draw takes less than 15 minutes. However ,the medical records of the blood collection centre will have my details and conversely if I am infected I can at least tell the medical detectives that I had a close contact with a phlebotomist and they can take it from there.

markharrison

28th April 2020, 08:56 PM

Do you think for a minute that they mean it will save you and me from Covid-19? I don't think so. That is what my definition of "will work" would be.

...

With the app missing more cases than it gets I feel that doing this would put individuals in harms way. So I won't download the app so I will not be counted as part of the 40% who, in effect, vote for this to happen by downloading the app. I am effectively voting against throwing people under the bus in favor of profit.I believe this could just as easily trigger a second wave of Covid-19 as benefit us. Singapore used an app when they were doing well and now look at them.

So to paraphrase; the app will work better if more people make use of it; but I'm not going to use it. Something of a paradox; but that's just my opinion, and of course you are free to have a differing opinion.

As for Singapore; they took their foot off the brakes too soon. The green light they saw was not the one immediately in front of them! They made a bad call. As far as I know, the app had next to nothing to do with their decision, but correct me if I have missed something.

My goal was never to persuade anyone they should or must do this. Just to present the facts about the app as a counterpoint to the [let's call it what it is] BS that the usual colourful "political" figures [I'm sure I don't need to name them...] have been ranting because they were beginning to feel as irrelevant as they actually are.

markharrison

28th April 2020, 09:11 PM

Could not agree more with this statement. Firmly believe that this app will be for statistical data with no real world affect on the spread of the virus.

You may find the origin story of modern epidemiology fascinating. I will add a link below but the essence of it is John Snow worked out how and where an epidemic of Cholera was being propagated in Soho London.

1854 Broad Street cholera outbreak - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1854_Broad_Street_cholera_outbreak)

He did with this statistics that -- funnily enough -- had a real world effect.

Bushmiller

29th April 2020, 01:31 AM

I wasn't going to contribute to this thread other than to vote in the poll. However, having read the comments, I believe that the app is really the government clutching at a straw and laying the ground for a chorous of "look what we did for you."

It seems doomed to failure as there are too many conditions to be met for it to work. At least 40% have to download the app and then that assumes all of that 40% have the app activated and have their phone with them. This probably means that to achieve that 40% a much higher figure is required.

The fundamental problem I see is that the app will encourage the populace to engage in practices that will lead to infection. It is a retrospective measure and not a preventative measure. One that will lead people into a false sense of confidence. It also supposes that you need fifteen minutes of close contact to contract the virus. I would suggest that one minute of contact in some circumstances is more than sufficient.

Just for the record I voted "unlikely" based on the comments above and particularly because I don't use a mobile phone. I have just realised as I write that I don't know what SWMBO is going to do: I must ask her. She has just replaced her old phone yesterday and while the new phone (I phone) is likely to have battery charge (unless the app does indeed drain the battery) she still has to remember to take it with her: Something that appears not to be second nature.

Theoretically we are both in the "high risk" category by virtue of age, but i don't see this technology as the answer to contracting the virus. Do the simple, common sense action and stay away from people.

Regards
Paul

doug3030

29th April 2020, 03:59 AM

So to paraphrase; the app will work better if more people make use of it; but I'm not going to use it. Something of a paradox; but that's just my opinion, and of course you are free to have a differing opinion.

Not really a paraphrase, is it? I never said it would work if more people used it, did I?

I said:-

With the app missing more cases than it gets I feel that doing this would put individuals in harms way. So I won't download the app so I will not be counted as part of the 40% who, in effect, vote for this to happen by downloading the app. I am effectively voting against throwing people under the bus in favor of profit.I believe this could just as easily trigger a second wave of Covid-19 as benefit us.

My intention there was to point out that the Government was setting 40% as the benchmark where they felt they had a mandate to make decisions based on the data. I never meant to imply that more than 40% would work any better. As I indicated earlier, I do not wish to be a part of granting that mandate to the government, hence I will not download the app.

Bushmiller, who posted later, may have explained it a little better when he said:-

... I believe that the app is really the government clutching at a straw and laying the ground for a chorous of "look what we did for you."

It seems doomed to failure as there are too many conditions to be met for it to work. At least 40% have to download the app and then that assumes all of that 40% have the app activated and have their phone with them. This probably means that to achieve that 40% a much higher figure is required.

The fundamental problem I see is that the app will encourage the populace to engage in practices that will lead to infection. It is a retrospective measure and not a preventative measure. One that will lead people into a false sense of confidence. It also supposes that you need fifteen minutes of close contact to contract the virus. I would suggest that one minute of contact in some circumstances is more than sufficient.

I had not thought it necessary to expand on my earlier comments to include that much detail but apparently, in the interest of brevity, I did not add sufficient detail and left it open to an interpretation I had not intended.

I agree with Bushmiller about the app leading people to take unnecessary risks as they somehow feel "protected" by the new invisible forcefield on their phone; just as the behavior I see from mask wearers being the ones most likely to breach social distancing in supermarkets as the mask gives them a false sense of protection.

As for your data remaining private and not available to the Government or anyone else - Once you give them permission to download the data, it will then be reformatted into another document, in this case a telephone log of people who need to be contacted. That document, as far as I know, will be subject to a different set of restrictions than the original download and will include more data as the calls are completed. This new data, containing your original data may be more readily available out of necessity to action it but it will contain all of your original data. This is a process "known in the trade" as sanitising. As I explained in an earlier post, that does not bother me personally in the slightest. Others may well have valid grounds for not wanting this to happen.

As for the 15 minute rule, has anyone seen a scientific explanation anywhere that explains why this was set as the trigger for a contact to count? Without a scientific basis it could just be a device to keep the data to a manageable level and nothing more. I would have thought that the person behind me in a checkout queue sneezing two or three times 1.5 metres away for two minutes or even less on the social distance marker was a more significant contact than standing and talking with someone a metre away for 15 minutes. But which one will the app pick up?

Fekit

29th April 2020, 09:26 AM

Agreed. As far as I'm concerned the most disturbing thing so far has been the carrot dangling.

How is it possible that the restrictions can be relaxed if 40% or more people download an app that clearly cannot stop you getting infected, or anybody else for that matter....seriously?

markharrison

29th April 2020, 10:26 AM

She has just replaced her old phone yesterday and while the new phone (I phone) is likely to have battery charge (unless the app does indeed drain the battery) she still has to remember to take it with her: Something that appears not to be second nature.

I will respond to the rest of this later (cos working right now) but I can confirm that the battery usage I have seen is so low, it barely registers. It must be in the fractions of a percent for it to not show in the iPhone energy usage. The lock screen uses about 4-5% for a meaningful comparison.

That would partly be because (like most of you) I am barely leaving the house. I said barely, but that doesn't mean I am not leaving the house, and I do carry my phone with me. A long held habit because I have had one for so long.

BobL

29th April 2020, 10:38 AM

As for the 15 minute rule, has anyone seen a scientific explanation anywhere that explains why this was set as the trigger for a contact to count? Without a scientific basis it could just be a device to keep the data to a manageable level and nothing more. I would have thought that the person behind me in a checkout queue sneezing two or three times 1.5 metres away for two minutes or even less on the social distance marker was a more significant contact than standing and talking with someone a metre away for 15 minutes. But which one will the app pick up?

Time related breathing related infections have been studied in some detail.

Recent research by Raina MacIntyre's group from the Kirby Institute has shown that by far most likely chance of infection is being for some time in the vicinity of an infected person breathing normally. The air volume around the infected starts to build up with <5 micron aerosols containing the virus and over time, if there is no or poor ventilation, a few viruses can spread as far as 8 metres but with the greatest viral loads closer to the infected person. Remember the chance of catching the virus from a few lone viruses is very low - the greater the viral load you take on board the more chance there is of you catching it. Viral load up take depends on amount of virus in the air and the number of breaths you take of that virally loaded air. The longer and closer to the infected person the greater the total viral uptake so the greater the chances of being infected. Unless you rapidly open your mouthing and take a couple deep breaths immediately after the sneeze the viral load from a couple of sneezes into your face is going to be significantly less than 15 minutes of regular breathing near an infected person also normally breathing.

On Coronacast yesterday Norman Swan discusses the 15 minute figure and said there have been studies that show that longer contacts significantly increase the chances of picking up the virus.
This is why its commonly picked up'
- in families
- at events like weddings etc
- in restaurants as opposed to picking up a takeaway. The most likely people to get it in restaurants are persons seated close to a carrier (not an infected waiter).
- in workplaces especially nursing homes and hospitals
- by travellers who spend time together.
- by people who sing in choirs
Etc

The chances of picking up the virus in a supermarket or Centrelink queue are so low the authorities are not concerned with that.

While the >15 minute time covers the most likely pickup time period, there is a certain amount of "keeping data manageable". This is why I'm keeping my own list of contacts.

BUT let's get back to the main aim of the App which is to reduce the huge workload of the virus detectives who trace and contact possible viral contactees. People who don't use the app are really just making their jobs more miserable. The App won't cure the virus but it will make current tracing operations much easier and catch more unknown contacts than is possible at present. If I was a 20 something social butterfly "spreader" then I would use it. If you become infected the app does not replace the interview with the disease detective. They still have to be told about any <15 minute potential contacts of known persons. But then instead of guessing the identity of the >15 minute known contacts they can contact them with the single push of a button.

Even though the Govt touts 40% It doesn't need 40% to work. To work it just has to reduce workload on the disease detectives. If 1% of people use it, it will recede the work load of these detectives by about 1%, if 50% use it it will reduce the load much further.

Fekit

29th April 2020, 02:12 PM

I realise that this is a developing thread and the information regarding the "äpp" is only coming out in dribs and drabs, so I understand for many it's difficult to make a comprehensive assessment of it.

Anyway, this little nugget just dropped;

Questions have been raised over the fact that the American cloud provider Amazon Web Services, which was given a Federal Government contract to store data collected by the government's COVIDSafe app, is using a data centre in Sydney which is fully owned by a Chinese company.

Needless to say "fully owned by a Chinese company" is a delusional expression.

Please feel free to read the article in question, it'll make your toes curl.

iTWire - COVIDSafe app: AWS using Chinese-owned data centre in Sydney, says Husic (https://www.itwire.com/government-tech-policy/covidsafe-app-aws-using-chinese-owned-data-centre-in-sydney,-says-husic.html)

poundy

29th April 2020, 04:20 PM

but @feckit, that is like saying that you shouldn't buy from the ABC store (are they still a thing?) because they're in a shopping centre owned by a foreign company.

Global Switch is a landlord. They run the electricity to keep the lights on and have a security guard at the door. What AWS or anyone do with their allocated and locked segment of the shopping centre is somewhat irrelevant to the landlord, and conversely, there's very little that the landlord does that can influence what the tenant does. That also trickles down from AWS (the service provider) to the COVIDSafe app; as long as you choose to use AWS' standard blocks, there's nothing they really know about your app other than you have bytes stored on disks they manage.

Fuzzie

29th April 2020, 07:21 PM

Well it would help if the App was compatible with my phone, it's not really old (Android 5.0.2), but I'm hardly going to go out and buy a new phone just to run it. :phone1:

Beardy

29th April 2020, 07:44 PM

Well it would help if the App was compatible with my phone, it's not really old (Android 5.0.2), but I'm hardly going to go out and buy a new phone just to run it. :phone1:

That sounds like a newer version than my jamb tin and string Mark II :q

Fuzzie

29th April 2020, 08:17 PM

That sounds like a newer version than my jamb tin and string Mark II :q

I was forced to upgrade my perfectly functional Jam Tin and String Mark I a couple of years ago when the internet banking app refused to run anymore. Worse than that it also stopped running on my Samsung 7.7" Wifi only tablet (Android 3.2 that I used far more frequently than the phone) after it had an upgrade that required the app to run on a phone with a sim card!

doug3030

1st May 2020, 10:02 AM

doug3030

1st May 2020, 10:16 AM

https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-2d0a428efc19145f55f8dc4504c040cd

woodPixel

1st May 2020, 01:56 PM

If they can use this technology in a drone, they could also use it at the entrance of shopping centres, sports stadiums and anywhere else that people gather.

I've been doing a good deal of gardening recently. Its a communal building, but they enjoy that its kept neat.

I bought and wear a Vietnamese "Non La" hat. It was only $15 delivered and the hand made quality is absolutely outstanding. I bought two.

Its absolutely fantastic - completely brilliant for Oz. Over the summer its been double-excellent! Kept me free of the sun, being burnt and (reasonably) cool (for the 43° days).

On another matter, and this might upset some people, but I also bought a ball bearing shanghai and a South African "Sjambok". Simple is better is troubling times.

Sci-fi often has stories of these tracking drones. Simple things overcome their ability to read them. A HAT is one of them. Simple black clothing...

A broad hat is a very sensible thing to have on in Australia considering the UV, sunburn, skin cancer and the sun... don't you think?

doug3030

1st May 2020, 03:18 PM

Sci-fi often has stories of these tracking drones. Simple things overcome their ability to read them. A HAT is one of them. Simple black clothing...

A broad hat is a very sensible thing to have on in Australia considering the UV, sunburn, skin cancer and the sun... don't you think?

It would work much better against more threats if you line it with aluminium foil too.

Simplicity

1st May 2020, 03:55 PM

If they can use this technology in a drone, they could also use it at the entrance of shopping centres, sports stadiums and anywhere else that people gather. A '''pandemic drone''' and other technology could help limit the spread of coronavirus and ease restrictions sooner, but at what cost? - ABC News (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-01/new-surveillance-technology-could-beat-coronavirus-but-at-a-cost/12201552)

The very first thing that popped into my head(hope the thought police were not around)
Was 1984 by George Orwell.

It may not happen in my life time,but that technology in the wrong hands(Chinese communist party plus others)
I would be a recking ball to modern society.

Cheers Matt.

doug3030

1st May 2020, 04:17 PM

The very first thing that popped into my head(hope the thought police were not around)
Was 1984 by George Orwell.

It may not happen in my life time,but that technology in the wrong hands(Chinese communist party plus others)
I would be a recking ball to modern society.

And that's just ONE of the ethical dilemmas that are on our horizon.

BobL

1st May 2020, 05:08 PM

The PM has been "dangling the carrot" of lifting more COVOD19 restrictions if we download the App. :yucky::puke:

What about people who think the lifting of existing restrictions are going a bit too fast?
Doesn't this give these people another reason not to download it.

AND

What about those who want the freedoms but not the app, they can just down load the App but not run it.

Too many ins, outs, sideways and verticals involved, not to mention treating Australians like preschoolers.

doug3030

1st May 2020, 05:13 PM

What about people who think the lifting of existing restrictions are going a bit too fast?
Doesn't this give these people another reason not to download it.

The eyes of Australia will be on the states that are lifting restrictions tomorrow to see how they are looking in a few weeks.

I hope they will be doing great but I am not optimistic that this will be the case.

KBs PensNmore

25th June 2020, 11:12 PM

BobL

26th June 2020, 08:37 AM

I got told Yesterday, I think it was, that the app has been automatically put on your phone.
If you got to settings, then under health I think it was, the app is there. Can confirm the details on Monday if I'm wrong.
This apparently only applies to the fancy smart type phones.
Big brother is watching where and who you associate with!!!!!
Kryn

I seriously doubt IT - if so this would be all over the media AND in in courts faster than COVID19 .

Don't know about the latest Vic cases but up until last Sunday the App has apparently not revealed any contacts that was not picked up by conventional means. Just listening to Norman Swan's take and he reckons the App should start to be more useful in the Vic situation.

Fekit

26th June 2020, 10:32 AM

You are correct. It is there.

Is is under Google Settings. All you have to do is ïnstall it or finish setting up a participating app. That it is not already running is probably delusional.

Not happy about this. Not one # bit.

BobL

26th June 2020, 10:57 AM

Big brother is watching where and who you associate with

No App has been installed - all that has been added is the OS requirements to be able to install and run the Android/Apple COVID tracking App.

See
Have Apple And Google Uploaded A COVID-19 Tracking App To Your Phone? The Facts Behind The Furor (https://www.forbes.com/sites/daveywinder/2020/06/20/have-apple-and-google-suddenly-uploaded-a-covid-19-tracking-app-to-your-phone-android-iphone-exposure-notification-contact-tracing/#6bd327460545)

You still have to download and activate the app.

FWIW it's not the same app as the Aust Govt App as it puts you in charge of your own data - no-one - not even you, can see who you have been in contact with.

Even if the authorities confiscate your phone they cannot see the contacts and there's no central data repository of the contacts and all of your old contacts get wiped after 14 days.

It's designed so that if you become infected, you can decide if you want to automatically anonymously notify your contacts (which you cannot see).

It does not notify the contacts who it was that sent them the message, just tells them they have been in contact with a "known" infected.

Now all I can see is a chance to make mischief.
After every time someone takes a long trip on public transport they can fire off the contact list the app has acquired and cause dozens of people to become concerned and go and get tested unnecessarily.

markharrison

26th June 2020, 12:38 PM

I got told Yesterday, I think it was, that the app has been automatically put on your phone.
If you got to settings, then under health I think it was, the app is there. Can confirm the details on Monday if I'm wrong.
This apparently only applies to the fancy smart type phones.
Big brother is watching where and who you associate with!!!!!
Kryn

Bob has adequately debunked this so I won't go into that any further.

Unfortunately the internet (read as, social media) is full of people whose lives are so pitiful that the only jollies they get in life is making stuff up and winding other people up.

If you see something on the internet and you are not certain if it is real; you're probably right.

D.W.

7th July 2020, 08:12 AM

I'm late and in the states, you know, the new epicenter where people are falling like feathers....

....ok, we have covid cases here but the reality is that only those who have occupational exposure and those who frequent bars and gyms are at that much of a chance of getting covid (and those who live with people who match that).

The whole initial "you'll touch it and get it" thing didn't really match the chinese studies or the news about mass exposure (in an enclosed environment with high viral load, like the early nursing homes, or at bars and parties) or how the progression (best off if low infection that eventually progresses to the lungs, worst breathing a lot, presumably because the bits go far into the lungs and there's less time for peoples' bodies to perfect an attack).

That said, I have asthma, supposedly that makes me at risk - if I had exposure potential, I would use a tracking app *as a courtesy to other people*.

If anyone is naive enough to think that their phone vendors aren't connecting identifiable location data to them and anyone they're with and selling it to someone else (including the government when the government has a need), they're completely in the weeds. The data is valuable and this just is - the whole setup is so far ahead of the legislative process that there's no reason to worry about privacy. you give that up with the phones and become a mark when getting upset about it and thinking that a later apology clears everything up (when it just lubricates everyone past the issue).

I'm sure we have some loony tunes here in the states who would get in a fistfight over the idea of a tracking app, but the same people would check their email and make sure they had their phone with them while fleeing the scene.

Fekit

7th July 2020, 01:00 PM

when it just lubricates everyone past the issue

That's an excellent expression, never heard it before, hope you don't mind me borrowing it.

poundy

7th July 2020, 01:06 PM

markharrison

7th July 2020, 01:11 PM

The whole initial "you'll touch it and get it" thing didn't really match the chinese studies or the news about mass exposure (in an enclosed environment with high viral load, like the early nursing homes, or at bars and parties) or how the progression (best off if low infection that eventually progresses to the lungs, worst breathing a lot, presumably because the bits go far into the lungs and there's less time for peoples' bodies to perfect an attack).

There is a new consensus (as in the past few days) from researchers that this is actually airborne. Which would explain a lot of the unknown infections origins.

... I would use a tracking app *as a courtesy to other people*.

And that there is the nub of the problem of modern life. Courtesy and consideration are now considered by a significant portion of people to be quaint and old-fashioned. Maybe that was always true and we didn't notice before social media...

If anyone is naive enough to think that their phone vendors aren't connecting identifiable location data to them and anyone they're with and selling it to someone else (including the government when the government has a need), they're completely in the weeds. The data is valuable and this just is - the whole setup is so far ahead of the legislative process that there's no reason to worry about privacy.

You can roughly triangulate approximate proximity from cell tower data. It is several order of magnitude more difficult though and not as precise. This is an area I have expertise in.

I'm sure we have some loony tunes here in the states who would get in a fistfight over the idea of a tracking app, but the same people would check their email and make sure they had their phone with them while fleeing the scene.

Don't worry, we have them too. Ignorance has never been a hindrance to strongly held opinions anywhere! At least now we have a name for it: The Dunning-Kreuger Effect.

D.W.

7th July 2020, 10:20 PM

@DW, I wouldn't understate the community infection like your words seem to imply. The current state of affairs in Victoria has come about through casual acquaintances of work colleagues, and social distancing not being considered important. The story we're hearing is that people sharing a cigarette break and sharing lighters were sufficient to pass this on. Hardly a party, a bar, or a nursing home. Sorry to be blunt, but your mis-informed statement is not what the AU medical profession want us to behave like, otherwise we will also get out of control community transmission.

I think you need to be a bit more selective about determining what's likely vs. what's possible, but it's not up to me what you determine is worth your while - it's up to you. Respiratory viruses are most easily passed by breathing droplets with the virus in them. The initial scare stories about aerosolization are based on being able to find the virus. I'm sure when you fart, there's virus (not you, specifically), just as they were able to find viable virus on a cruise ship in CA 17 days after it was unboarded (whatever the right word is for that). The issue isn't whether or not the virus is there, but is it there in such a way that we are likely to contract.

your cigarette example is two-pronged - how close are you smoking cigarettes, is someone coughing or is it windy? If you are sitting on a bench somewhere and you both continue to clear your throats while smoking, that seems dumb, but it can do the very thing that's not debatable - toss droplets into the air, from one person to another. Would you share a cigarette? I sure hope not, so let's put that one out. If you're outside with a friend and there's a breeze, I doubt you'll ever be able to get a significant enough amount to be dosed.

I have not participated in the wiping down mail stuff or any of that other nonsense - I read studies on the NIH website here in the states (many from China, but they did an excellent job below the surface of politics of providing good study information). I paid attention to the cases where a large percentage became very sick (that's what you want to avoid). It was always inside somewhere that someone could get a significant viral load in an enclosed space.

I mentioned above why this is important to me. It was unclear how much of a risk factor asthma was, and there was a lot of intentional misinformation by the government (don't buy toilet paper, diarrhea isn't a symptom - yet chinese study information showed that it was a symptom about 50% of the time, you don't need n95 masks and they shouldn't be publicly available - well, the viral particles are. 07 to .09 micron in size. How big are the droplets? i don't know. If they're telling us at the time that it could be aerosolized and not just droplet transmissions, they're also advocating that we should essentially make a bucket out of 1" screen to hold sand.

The whole 6 foot thing is easy to communicate to people. When you're inside, it's not adequate. When you're outside and just passing people casually, it's probably not necessary at all.

Why aren't things communicated so? The government (yours included) has no real requirement to give you precise information.

What did ours do? They came out later and said they lied about the masks to protect health care professionals. I knew that's what they were doing. Then, they followed up to say that they thought transmission by touching mail and purchased items was very unlikely, and now the sentiment seems to be coming forward here that it's almost entirely transferred from one person to another in enclosed spaces by breathing, not touching. Again, what's likely, not what's possible. If 1% of the transmission is by touching and 99% by breathing, I know where I'm spending my time.

One more-follow-up comment. We never had high viral numbers here (pittsburgh) early on. We shut down early, and the spreading points for the virus were either areas with lots of travel from china (california, the west coast) or europe (NYC tourism, i'm sure there was euro and chinese travel there). That makes us ripe for the second wave. About a month ago we reopened bars. I told my wife that I will not go to a bar or sit in a restaurant because the second wave will come from younger people in bars and people who go to restaurants. If the restaurant is outside, then i'd be OK with that. The virus survives only a couple of hours at the very most out side and if it's on a surface, the issue is simple - I don't get a big dose of it in my nose, mouth or eyes. Not difficult.

So, we have a second wave here now. Double the case count that we had before. Median age this time, 31. That wasn't hard to figure out. I wear a cloth mask here in situations where it's legally required, but many of those aren't likely for transmission. If you get food at a drive through here, you must wear a mask. Transmission is extremely unlikely, but it's the law. I'll make fun of it. I will not frequent elevators somewhere that there is a high infection rate. The CDC suggests no more than 3 people in an elevator at one time, and people should stand in corners to be 6 feet apart. This is sheer stupidity. We are told that we should sanitize our fingers (elevator buttons) and the subject of a tiny space that could be filled with droplets for a very long time (and you'd never see nor near the person who coughed or sneezed them) doesn't come up.

The problem with understanding this for many is that it's become regional and political. That's dumb. Politics doesn't solve problems. Politics uses problems. I solve problems for a living - I can find a better answer than the government's general guidelines.

Think about the drug study info. Chloroquine - half of the country here likes it, half hates it. Because of politics. It has a small statistically non-significant benefit. In my mind, it's not worth getting concerned over either way. Any treatment that is materially beneficial would show significance. The next wonder something or other, remdesivir - the Chinese did studies along with chloroquine. Again, no significant benefit. Initial studies here, no benefit. When it became politically popular to find an alternative to Chloroquine (which probably served mostly as placebo), then suddenly, remdesivir ignores a bunch of previous studies, they claim to have found a weak positive effect (again, not statistically significant) and suddenly, it's "how long until this drug is available?"

I believe that people would make a request to their doctors (and even some ground level docs will prescribe) based on their political views. That's stupid.

D.W.

7th July 2020, 10:34 PM

That's an excellent expression, never heard it before, hope you don't mind me borrowing it.

I made it up, but as with everything you make up, i doubt someone else hasn't made it up, too.

It's a description I came up with talking with an attorney colleague of mine (she's an attorney, i'm an actuary). She was frustrated with her husband (nuke-engineer) who she mentioned to me was inconsistent and she was always catching him making statements that conflicted with another statement that he'd made earlier. She and I are probably a big aspergergy (literal, well grab on to things like a bulldog and try to compare and solve -we've had that discussion also). I asked her what her husband's reaction was when she pointed out his inconsistency and said "I'll bet he looks less like he was caught and more like he's been inconvenienced".

??? was her response.

As someone who is probably "a bit aspergery" I notice patterns. I notice that otherwise competent people are either lazy or unintentionally (the latter) loose with their own explanations to lubricate themselves through a situation. Something comes up that may potentially cause a fight? The wagon wheels come to a halt. Lubricate the conversation with a little white lie and expect that either the person who you're talking to won't question it, or they will recognize that you're being misleading on purpose to lubricate the wheels and roll past the problem.

There's an implied request for courtesy in this case, too - I'm sure her husband was misdirecting or shifting the conversation around to let her know that he wasn't interested in arguing. She hadn't considered it because he's taking in some bad habits (think increasing alcohol consumption, increasing interest in partisan politics and creating simplistic arguments to explain away who is responsible for his issues), and said "huh........now I feel a little less good about humanity".

I suggested she watch her colleagues, who can otherwise write tight legal arguments, but at least some of them will pee her off by not being truthful. She thinks they're intermittently incompetent. Now she knows that they're selectively incompetent.

They have the oil can to lubricate the wheels when the conversation could come to a halt in a bad place.

More info than you probably wanted, but you can spread the use of my pet term :)

(governments do this all the time, of course. Provide simplified guidelines, partial explanations, etc, and so do opinion articles and media writers - it's just a lot easier than being as precise as you possibly can because that often doesn't help your case).

BobL

8th July 2020, 11:07 AM

well, the viral particles are. 07 to .09 micron in size. How big are the droplets? i don't know. If they're telling us at the time that it could be aerosolized and not just droplet transmissions, they're also advocating that we should essentially make a bucket out of 1" screen to hold sand.

1) Unless working in an enclosed/unventilated space with heavily infected persons, lone viral particles are relatively rare and have a shorter lifetime in air than if they are in water droplet or aerosol. For someone over 90 with serious health complications a lone virus can possibly cause a problem. If you are 20 something with a robust immune system then you can probably tolerate exposure to a large viral load without any problems.

2) The smaller a particle is, the less likely it is to make contact with a respiratory tract surface on the way in and the more likely it is to be breathed out again.
On the way out, viruses are more likely to attach themselves to drops and aerosols. This means they slightly more likely to make contact with respiratory tract surfaces and more importantly be filtered so the virus sits on the inside of the mask. If the wearer is working in a high viral load area for some time, a significant viral load can then build up on the inside of the mask - this is another reason why they should not be used for too long.

3) The greatest viral loads will usually be on the largest droplets which will be mostly filtered out by even basic face coverings.

4) Viral loads on smaller (aerosols) particles will usually depends on aerosol size but most aerosols will easily filtered by P2/N95 masks.

5) P2 and N95 masks will filter considerable amounts of even <0.1 micron aerosols. They usually perform significant better than their minimum rating (95% at 0.3 microns) and the longer they are are worn, the more they clog up and the finer they filter. I have measured P2 filters with 99.8% filtration at 0.3 microns

6) P3 masks are rated for 99.97% at 0.3 micron - these also filter 99.97% at 0.2 microns and continue to perform very efficiently even at <0.1 microns.

7) The real effectiveness issue for masks is not the filter media efficiency but the reliability of the fit. This is why full face respirators are (or should be) used in COVID wards.

Some of my testing results are here
https://www.woodworkforums.com/f200/testing-mask-filter-media-233885/3#post2188384

A Duke

8th July 2020, 11:14 AM

I should be O K. Norton has just renewed my 360 anti-virus.
:wink:

poundy

8th July 2020, 11:26 AM

I should be O K. Norton has just renewed my 360 anti-virus.
:wink:
friends don't let friends pay symantec for products they don't need. Defender will also protect you and is free.

A Duke

8th July 2020, 11:45 AM

friends don't let friends pay symantec for products they don't need. Defender will also protect you and is free.

Hi,
I am still running Vista, not 10.
But thanks for your concern.
Regards

poundy

8th July 2020, 11:53 AM

Hi,
I am still running Vista, not 10.
But thanks for your concern.
Regards
ok, that's actually a bigger issue that I'd pay attention to. There are no security updates at all for that platform, so you really are dodging the bad guys. One malware loaded ad on a website could jeopardise everything you do. If your hardware is capable and you need a hand with the upgrade, don't hesitate to ping me. I'm formerly a Microsoft employee but please don't hold that against me ;)

D.W.

9th July 2020, 01:10 AM

Hi,
I am still running Vista, not 10.
But thanks for your concern.
Regards

if you keep it long enough, it'll be too old for anyone to be interested in writing viruses for it. Then it'll really be ideal!

D.W.

9th July 2020, 01:19 AM

1) Unless working in an enclosed/unventilated space with heavily infected persons, lone viral particles are relatively rare and have a shorter lifetime in air than if they are in water droplet or aerosol. For someone over 90 with serious health complications a lone virus can possibly cause a problem. If you are 20 something with a robust immune system then you can probably tolerate exposure to a large viral load without any problems.

2) The smaller a particle is, the less likely it is to make contact with a respiratory tract surface on the way in and the more likely it is to be breathed out again.
On the way out, viruses are more likely to attach themselves to drops and aerosols. This means they slightly more likely to make contact with respiratory tract surfaces and more importantly be filtered so the virus sits on the inside of the mask. If the wearer is working in a high viral load area for some time, a significant viral load can then build up on the inside of the mask - this is another reason why they should not be used for too long.

3) The greatest viral loads will usually be on the largest droplets which will be mostly filtered out by even basic face coverings.

4) Viral loads on smaller (aerosols) particles will usually depends on aerosol size but most aerosols will easily filtered by P2/N95 masks.

5) P2 and N95 masks will filter considerable amounts of even <0.1 micron aerosols. They usually perform significant better than their minimum rating (95% at 0.3 microns) and the longer they are are worn, the more they clog up and the finer they filter. I have measured P2 filters with 99.8% filtration at 0.3 microns

6) P3 masks are rated for 99.97% at 0.3 micron - these also filter 99.97% at 0.2 microns and continue to perform very efficiently even at <0.1 microns.

7) The real effectiveness issue for masks is not the filter media efficiency but the reliability of the fit. This is why full face respirators are (or should be) used in COVID wards.

Some of my testing results are here
https://www.woodworkforums.com/f200/testing-mask-filter-media-233885/3#post2188384

Somewhere around a month ago, there was a chart going around in the news (not sure who published it) that suggested that transmission chance with one person wearing a cloth mask (instead of none) was reduced by about 2/3rds. Both mask wearing and the chance of transmission would drop to 10% of no mask wearing.

That's OK (better than nothing), but it doesn't cut it for someone at risk.

There's the sieve issue, and the other issue of fitting. There's no real way to get most of the cloth masks to seal, so you're stuck guessing whether or not your particular mask is doing anything.

I do as they suggest and wear a cloth mask. I'd wear n95 masks if I could get them reasonable, but that's not the situation here. I'd be a bit less annoyed if the government had been honest from the outset -instead, you'd see people rolling around in wheelchairs with loose fitting cloth masks here. I'd forgo the n95 stuff entirely if there could be some system-wide honesty about getting the better masks on the high risk individuals - but instead we got a public message "anything for a a mask is fine" to eliminate bidding against the health system. and then the states and health systems started bidding against each other here.

My wife works in a wound care practice. They prioritized masks at first to the ER and ICU (of course, this is reasonable). Then, they banned practitioners in any other area in the hospital from wearing an n95 mask because it could confuse other practitioners (when this broke out, many of the nurses and therapists are married to tradesmen and hobbyists and headed to work with n95 masks. They were told to take them off, even if they were theirs, or face discipline or possible termination). That's part of being an employee - it's a stupid rule, but businesses often demand employees follow stupid rules, sometimes unsafe.

Now, the rule at work is that they must wear a mask, it can be anything, but the employee has to supply their own. The hospital will provide one paper mask per week to supplement, but the paper mask can only be worn for one day.

BobL

9th July 2020, 09:03 AM

Somewhere around a month ago, there was a chart going around in the news (not sure who published it) that suggested that transmission chance with one person wearing a cloth mask (instead of none) was reduced by about 2/3rds. Both mask wearing and the chance of transmission would drop to 10% of no mask wearing.
That's based mainly on the efficiency on the average cloth mask media but there's a lot more to it that this,

There's the sieve issue, and the other issue of fitting. There's no real way to get most of the cloth masks to seal, so you're stuck guessing whether or not your particular mask is doing anything.

Fitting issues lead to masks having two efficiencies - one is efficiency with respect to inhaled air, which tends to push the mask onto the wearers face. The other is when exhaling which tends to push the mask away from the wearer. Hence the efficiency is usually better for inhaling than exhaling.

A related effect is the restrictiveness of media. The media used in cheaper masks and some cloth masks can be quite restrictive this results in more leaks (lower efficiency) especially on exhaling. Because of this some masks manufacturers fit masks with an exhaling valve - this is fine for woodworkers but not so good for COVID transmission.

As the average cloth mask is usually not that restrictive, fitting turns out to be less of an issue than for higher filtration efficiency masks that use restrictive media and are ill fitting to the user.

This is why in critical situations it is important to use masks that are made and tested to a known standard (for restrictiveness and efficiency)

Now, the rule at work is that they must wear a mask, it can be anything, but the employee has to supply their own. The hospital will provide one paper mask per week to supplement, but the paper mask can only be worn for one day.
Sadly this looks like third world stuff.

I visited my dentist recently and was pleased to see he and all his employees wearing high end surgical masks. He has increased the ventilation through his rooms and he used dedicated aerosol extractor while working on my teeth Aerosol Extractor (https://www.woodworkforums.com/f200/aerosol-extractor-235522)

cava

9th July 2020, 10:24 AM

Pity the POLL is closed, as it would be interesting to assess the change in people’s opine the longer this thing drags on.

markharrison

9th July 2020, 01:34 PM

My wife works in a wound care practice. They prioritized masks at first to the ER and ICU (of course, this is reasonable). Then, they banned practitioners in any other area in the hospital from wearing an n95 mask because it could confuse other practitioners (when this broke out, many of the nurses and therapists are married to tradesmen and hobbyists and headed to work with n95 masks. They were told to take them off, even if they were theirs, or face discipline or possible termination). That's part of being an employee - it's a stupid rule, but businesses often demand employees follow stupid rules, sometimes unsafe.

Now, the rule at work is that they must wear a mask, it can be anything, but the employee has to supply their own. The hospital will provide one paper mask per week to supplement, but the paper mask can only be worn for one day.

In the capitalist societies we live in (even more so in the USA); unions have a poor reputation amongst people that would most benefit from being a member of one. The outcome of a successful campaign to demonise unions as fundamentally corrupt; by those in power that actually are corrupt and really don't have working people's interest at heart! This is an excellent example of why unions are important; and why the suppression of unions has -- and is -- a bad thing for working people.

Frankly, that is the sort of BS you would expect in a failed state.

D.W.

13th July 2020, 12:06 AM

In the capitalist societies we live in (even more so in the USA); unions have a poor reputation amongst people that would most benefit from being a member of one. The outcome of a successful campaign to demonise unions as fundamentally corrupt; by those in power that actually are corrupt and really don't have working people's interest at heart! This is an excellent example of why unions are important; and why the suppression of unions has -- and is -- a bad thing for working people.

Frankly, that is the sort of BS you would expect in a failed state.

I'm sure it's going on there, and you're not hearing about it. The issue is simple - when you divert masks toward the critical areas of hospitals, then the support staff doesn't get the same quality in masks. We mention it here in the US because we're not afraid of reality.

China may have the upper hand on something like this because they can manufacture the masks, but they also have the upper hand in that they can squash anyone who talks about it. We don't do that here.

The reality so far is that nobody in my wife's clinic has gotten covid and I didn't figure they would, either, it was just an illustration of human nature, not unions or capitalism.

The nurses in the clinic are union/collectively bargained. The union didn't have any issue with it, either.

What's interesting is that when this is brought up, because you guys don't seem to have an objective view of the news and there's a strong "we aussies are better and care more, thus we'll say that and ignore the real numbers", you perceive something different than reality. Part of that is the fault of the news.

The assumption that the case rate in the US is at 1% of the population is errant. The one reliable stat so far with covid is that in organized countries, the death rate is around .005% or a little bit lower. Health care here is far superior to there. You don't have to believe it, and the news may not say that, but the resources spent here and the potential for economic gain (and the competition) is why. We have stratified levels of coverage and access isn't universal, but seeking care here at the highest level results in more resources and treatment per patient than anywhere else in the world. Literally something like 18% of our GDP is spent on it and though we're something like a 20th of the world's population, i'd guess more than half of the advances in medicine come from ehre.

Saying that, with about 350 million people in the US, we have 137k deaths so far.

Australia's population is 25 million - you have about 10k deaths so far.

The likely total case rate and death rates in both countries are just about identical. Do the math.

The obnoxious thing here in the middle of this isn't too little regulation, it's too much. Our medical system has scads of potentially viable vaccines. I live 5 miles from the health system that developed the polio vaccine. They had a viable vaccine to try that creates covid antibodies in mice in about two weeks. Why? Because they have a gigantic vaccine practice and already had vaccine options for sars. Thus far, nobody has been able to try the vaccines because our government thinks that treating lots of people who didn't want covid is ethical, but allowing 25 volunteers to sign up to try a vaccine and create a fast path toward gathering data presents an ethical dilemma. Likely, zero of them would die. The potential payoff is saving hundreds of thousands around the world from death.

It's just plain goofy hearing about how well covid is controlled elsewhere, but not here, only to find out the overall death rate per capita is about the same or worse. Pure propaganda.

We can see real time data at health systems here. My wife's place of employment is a gigantic 600 bed hospital. In the middle of the first outbreak, the hospital notified staff twice for resource updates - each time, they had covid patients in the low teens, about half of those in the ICU on ventilators, and the other half just in the hospital. In some parts of houston and early on in new york, the health systems were at capacity. Each time they got close, we shut down.

The notion that we're going to have a vaccine that's viable and ahead of virus mutation is a nice academic ideal. It doesn't appear to match reality very well so far.

I do work for unions (benefits). I think on average, the union workers are better off than their non-union counterparts but the wage package here for most trades is around $60 an hour for unskilled labor and $70-$100 an hour for skilled labor. The reality is that not all projects can afford those labor rates. The cost of providing benefits and pensions to retirees are generally half of the wage package, perhaps slightly more on the low side (the laborers may have hourly wage rates around $25 US, which is about $35 there I would guess) and a big retiree population to care for. Retirees get a large percentage of their pre-retirement income as a pension income and generally get free or near free medical through age 65.

You cannot bid residential work at $80 an hour on average, people won't pay for it. You end up with a system that is a combination.

The unions are smart enough here to realize that if they make too many demands of the private systems, the number of employed men and women will go down and they won't be able to take care of their retired members. Reality isn't as simple as you think it is.

doug3030

13th July 2020, 12:19 AM

Australia's population is 25 million - you have about 10k deaths so far.

The likely total case rate and death rates in both countries are just about identical. Do the math.

Actually to date we in Australia have only had 108 deaths from COvid. We haven't even had 10k identified cases yet. Not sure where you get your information from but maybe you should redo YOUR math.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) current situation and case numbers | Australian Government Department of Health (https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-health-alert/coronavirus-covid-19-current-situation-and-case-numbers)

D.W.

13th July 2020, 12:29 AM

Let's have a look at a society that lives mostly by it's production here (we don't have mineral or surplus energy resources that allow us to live in a false reality)

PPP GDP per capita in the US is nominally higher than australia. Once you normalize the GDP for purchasing power, it's much higher than australia (About 25% higher). PPP GDP checked for dispersion is probably the best measure of standard of living from one country to the next. You can assert life expectancy is, but that ignores individual choice by people.

Health care here is same day usually at your PCP's office for anything if you want it to be, and walk in options elsewhere (covered by insurance are practically unlimited - even in rural areas). Specialist access is pretty much immediate with waiting only for the most notable practitioners - e.g., if you are a baseball professional and you want T.J. surgery by the best surgeon, you may have to wait for him. IT's probably worth waiting. If you just want shoulder surgery as a layman from a highly rated surgeon, access is pretty much immediate.

If you are indigent, you get a monthly income, free health care, free food, and free or subsidized living accommodations, internet access, assistance with utility bills. We have a gigantic socialist safety net that people like to pretend is not there. There is one condition that you need to meet to get it - you have to spend down your own personal assets first before qualifying. you want the government to cover your expenses and keep your own money? Tough. These rules are often skirted by folks who qualify for disability and spend down their recorded assets, but then work under the table in the cash economy on the side here.

**

separately, the median income in the US here per individual (not full time, but across all individuals) is $40100 as of last year. In aus, it's about $50k aud, but adjust that to currency, and that number is equivalent to $33k in USD. Adjust for purchasing parity (the strength of a purchasing dollar, as to what you can actually buy) and australia suffers about another 10%. So the median income is about 75% in actual standard of living there.

You can create situations where an american could get themselves in trouble with that, which is refusing to find a job with benefits and going uninsured. That's not necessary here, and is stupid, but the volunteers who do that are often self employed and they choose to forgo coverage. I think it's a bad decision, but it's your right here. coverage for a healthy individual age 40 is somewhere around $4k a year. There's an urge, especially for people starting businesses, to put their wellbeing aside. For younger individuals, it's magnified (and their cost of coverage is even lower, perhaps 5-7% of their total income). The tax system is hugely progressive, so even if those individuals pay social safety net taxes, they often pay nothing in federal income taxes (or get a credit in return for being below a certain wage level). Health care is subsidized further for people below poverty levels.

The picture painted around the world based on "pat ourselves on the back because we're not the US" is idealistic pandering.

It's popular here to talk about how great it is everywhere else because of the opposite factor - people love to believe they're driving a really tough road when they're not.

I've got an English friend who is an engineer - he's retired, grew up in England and couldn't get an engineering job as a child because his dad was a joiner. The class system there isn't as strong as it used to be, but it's meaningless here. You want to be a hematologist and your dad worked at mcdonalds? You don't have to hide it. You may find an employer who is clamoring to give you a shot because they'd just love to have you as a newsletter story.

This friend of mine just watched his father die in England in a nursing home over a period of about a year. He is fabulously liberal (hates trump, of course), but says to me all the time "you have no idea how lucky you are to have been born here. No idea. " Actually, he says it in an admonishing tone. I suppose he was used to teh customer service type setup here with end of life care and it's not as responsive, expensive or as clean in the UK and there are fewer options. He thought overall, the level of care there was unacceptable. I reminded him that it cost half as much and as a cheapskate, I'd choose the cheaper less responsive option if it was available. He wouldn't.

When our european guests (from denmark, london and scotland) come here, they first look for gunshots and four wheel drive trucks (due to the farcical shows marketed overseas), and then instantly want to go on a drinking and eating binge due to the taste and low cost of the food and services here relative to europe. They talk about the fat shaming shows in the UK, so we help them find the "biggies" when we're out walking around. That's what they're looking for, but they seem to want to come here often and don't think that it's fair that we don't have a mortgage.

D.W.

13th July 2020, 12:33 AM

Actually to date we in Australia have only had 108 deaths from COvid. We haven't even had 10k identified cases yet. Not sure where you get your information from but maybe you should redo YOUR math.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) current situation and case numbers | Australian Government Department of Health (https://www.health.gov.au/news/health-alerts/novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov-health-alert/coronavirus-covid-19-current-situation-and-case-numbers)

my mistake, that's cases. You guys may be a special case in that you're not generally a tourist destination for western europeans or chinese tourists (which are how the virus was delivered here in huge numbers before it was detected).

The rest of my commentary above holds. In places where the system is like yours (western europe) and the virus was introduced in large numbers, the outcome has been similar. Except we really haven't seen an overwhelmed health care system other than in newspapers. We have seen ICU fully subscribed, but health care utilization here is down about 30% due to the drop off of elective an delayable items, so the health care system is on the other end - it's underutilized and hurting financially because of it, not experiencing a windfall due to a packed house.

riverbuilder

13th July 2020, 09:02 AM

You lost me at “living in a false reality “. I think you may have been digesting too much Donald Trump rhetoric.

doug3030

13th July 2020, 09:02 AM

my mistake, that's cases. You guys may be a special case in that you're not generally a tourist destination for western europeans or chinese tourists.

Yes we are.

The difference is that our leaders took it seriously and despite a few mistakes have put measures in place which have actually helped contain the situation, whereas your president is on record as saying that it will just go away by itself.

BobL

13th July 2020, 09:20 AM

my mistake, that's cases. You guys may be a special case in that you're not generally a tourist destination for western europeans or chinese tourists (which are how the virus was delivered here in huge numbers before it was detected).

We get about 1.4 million Chinese visitors a year to Australia

Per 1000 inhabitants Australia gets 265 international tourists where as USA gets 191

The top countries represented are, from the top China, New Zealand, USA and UK, Japan, Singapore and India, Malaysia, HK and South Korea

Glider

13th July 2020, 11:52 AM

The irony in this thread is palpable. Only 15% of respondents would download the COVID app without reservation. 33% said never, and another 32% would, but only if they were assured of its security, despite the government having provided those assurances with its introduction. Yes, we acted early and our feds coordinated a nation wide plan of management. The majority of our citizenry have cooperated well, but so have they in the U.S. because fear is a great motivator. We went early and hard and fortunately even our neo-cons decided to listen to the experts for once.

Putting sh*t on another person's country is way out of line IMO. D.W. is right saying that our information mostly comes from the press. That source is selective, commercially and politically motivated, and frequently inaccurate. And don't get me started about the internet.

I lived and worked in Manhattan for a number of years and was staggered when I heard friends' attitudes and opinions about what goes on in the States when we came home on leave. They were so wrong. I still subscribe to the NY Times, but that's only a small slice. You have to live there.

Australia was lucky to have a government intent on producing a balanced budget when the rest of the G20 were spending on infrastructure in these times of low interest rates. I said lucky, not necessarily sensible. Dumb luck. What the U.S. and others wouldn't welcome at present is another large addition to their deficit, hence the need to get back to work asap, tragically at a cost to human life.

I was interesting to learn that Huawei relies on U.S. semi-conductors for their 5G network. I believe Washington "snapped its fingers" and told their manufacturer in Taiwan to turn off the tap to China. I guess the poms will now have to look elsewhere. America leads the world in technology and daylight comes second.

There's lots of things I don't like about the U.S. system; same with Australia's. But let's not start patting ourselves on the back. Even our record period of growth was only due to migration. Take that out of the equation and GDP would have flatlined.

mick

markharrison

13th July 2020, 02:02 PM

Putting sh*t on another person's country is way out of line IMO. D.W. is right saying that our information mostly comes from the press. That source is selective, commercially and politically motivated, and frequently inaccurate. And don't get me started about the internet.

Not what I did, but never mind. My commentary was on the way health care workers (and more generally, workers) in the USA have been let down by the way unions have been emasculated and this is the consequences of it. Hardly a controversial opinion when the people responsible for doing this openly brag about it. To give just one example, see the Koch brothers.

I work for a large Australian multi-national healthcare company. I am privy to information about testing rates here and abroad. I am not authorised to share this information.

On Friday, I became aware of the positive test rates for Austin, TX. I am very, Very, VERY, V E R Y, concerned about where those numbers are heading. The person that communicated that information is an officer of the company. The numbers are totally credible based on the source; to me.

I am not an epidemiologist; I'm not even a medical professional, of any kind. The people that run this company are though, and I do have education in higher mathematics. I understand these numbers.

But, to you and anyone else reading this, of course; I'm just some guy on the internet. Don't just accept what I, or anyone else, says without doing your own verification.

Search for positive test results; asymptomatic and symptomatic. Luckily, being numbers -- therefore kinda fact based -- they are not very likely to be featured on Brietbart, Fox, InfoWars and similar because it would kind of undercut their story...

I lived and worked in Manhattan for a number of years and was staggered when I heard friends' attitudes and opinions about what goes on in the States when we came home on leave. They were so wrong. I still subscribe to the NY Times, but that's only a small slice. You have to live there.

Which, in my extensive experience with working in the USA, far exceeds the average USA citizen's knowledge of what happens outside of the 48 contiguous states. I have literally had the "Wow you speak great English" response. For real! Admittedly, that was NC, not NY. Even cab drivers in NY know where Australia is, but their knowledge of Australia was kinda limited to Steve Irwin and similar cultural stereotypes.

Australia was lucky to have a government intent on producing a balanced budget when the rest of the G20 were spending on infrastructure in these times of low interest rates. I said lucky, not necessarily sensible. Dumb luck. What the U.S. and others wouldn't welcome at present is another large addition to their deficit, hence the need to get back to work asap, tragically at a cost to human life.

The perception of the "balanced budget" that our government was what they were trying to project anyway. The budget reality is quite different.

We are lucky though. Lucky the government didn't react with the ideological brickbat they used on the opposition when they were in government during the GFC. Lucky that our conservative government took broad advice and acted on it with rational responses. There are things that are not perfect and I would do differently but overall a solid B+, in my non-conservative opinion.

There's lots of things I don't like about the U.S. system; same with Australia's. But let's not start patting ourselves on the back. Even our record period of growth was only due to migration. Take that out of the equation and GDP would have flatlined.

On this we agree. No system is perfect; nor will there ever be one. All democracies rely on all parties (in the more broad sense than political parties) acting in good faith. Unfortunately, there is a significant portion of conservatives in Australia that are looking to the USA for inspiration. I don't think that is ultimately useful for conservative politics because there are so many differences between the US political system and ours. I do not see politics as practiced in the contemporary USA as a great role model, on either side.

We are long long way away from being through this. This is not even the end of the first act of this tragic play.

Unfortunately the incompetence of the US federal response (and other similar minded jurisdictions like Brazil et cetera) have probably condemned humanity to live with COVID-19 and its successors forever. That said, there are so many countries where this was going to be the case anyway because they do not have the resources to deal with it; it was going to happen anyway. It's just worse than it could have been if the USA had competent leadership. Describing the USA leadership during this period as incompetent is the kindest possible spin that one could put on it and hardly controversial.