sdbryan

About

Username
sdbryan
Joined
Visits
50
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
74
Badges
0
Posts
349
  • China sees no reason to keep iPhones if WeChat is banned

    red oak said:
    It’s a matter of time before Apple pulls out of China.   And all that manufacturing, developer, retail, and R&D investments can find a new home 

    And it will signal to the rest of the world that China is now closed for business

    Once Trump moves from the WhiteHouse to the BigHouse, none of that will be necessary.   The Trump made crisis will be over.
    I wish your assessment were correct, but I suspect the widespread damage will take many years if it is even possible to rectify. The US has shown that it is a comletely unreliable partner: withdrawal from the Paris accords, scrapping multi-nation Iran treaty, defunding the WHO during a global pandemic, erecting damaging tariffs on allies and adversaries alike, denigrating the NATO alliance and our European allies, the list just keeps going on.

    The rest of the world has learned there is a bewildering more than a third of the electorate who will enthusiastically support a historically dishonest and incompetent demagogue as our president. Even if Trump loses (not assured because even before Trump the GOP has done a good job of voter supression) and even if he faces consequences for flaunting the laws, why would we suddenly be considered a nation to be trusted to lead? We have many fences to mend (and Mexico won’t pay for it).
    muthuk_vanalingamGeorgeBMacwatto_cobra
  • APHL partners with Apple, Google and Microsoft on national COVID-19 Exposure Notification ...

    Finally some good news about doing more than just trying to avoid Covid-19. I agree that in the short run there are not good prospects for sufficient adoption but given present leadership we sadly may have plenty of time for adoption to grow while the threat continues to be a fact of life (in the US).

    As indicated by previous individuals, anyone with a cellphone is continually sharing identity and position in order for the phone to function. This protocol shares neither identity nor position. It is just about notification of possible exposure and thus is much more privacy protective than the billions of cellphones in use.
    gatorguylarryjwgregoriusm
  • Contact tracing app vetted by Apple found to share data with Foursquare and Google

    Well now it has just veered into the bizarre. I suppose I should have said well established contact tracing rather than ‘traditional’. Also the example of Hong Kong gives considerable credence to the notion that essentially universal use of face masks is another option that has proven to be remarkably effective (but sadly not an option for us). Also it was reported yesterday that Germany and several other countries have announced they will be incorporating the Apple/Google protocol in their efforts.

    My motivation for speaking up here was in response to comments that appeared to question whether Apple/Google exposure notification would actually deliver without compromising privacy. Response delivered and now it seems to be going off into the weeds so I will get off your lawn.
    gatorguy
  • Contact tracing app vetted by Apple found to share data with Foursquare and Google

    sdbryan said:
    command_f said:
    lkrupp said:
    Anyone who downloads and installs these contact tracing apps should have their heads examined. We can’t trust ANY of these bastards, including Apple.
    Really? I trust Apple (beyond the usual errors that everyone makes), mostly because their motives are clear. At worst, it's not in their selfish interest not to protect our data. You have to pick who you trust but you do have to pick someone; if not, bin that smart phone, and the feature phone, because the network tracks them all. They kind-of have to, of course, so they can deliver your calls to you.

    As to "these tracing apps", they aren't all the same. The Apple/Google framework is yet to be released* so it can't have failed already, the UK's NHS app uses entirely an different implementation and they've open-sourced their software so that the ethical hackers can help them improve it.

    You can't use the fact that one app sounds as though it's dodgy to condemn the whole class. That's like saying Android phones are poor so iPhones must be too.

    *My bad: it was released yesterday. I think my point still stands.
    Yes, Apple's motives are clear:   promote privacy above all else.  And normally that is a good thing.

    But, in this case, putting privacy above all else means putting it above the lives of tens of thousands --- because a lack of effective testing  & follow-up tracing means death to tens of thousands.  Are you willing to sacrifice your own life or the life of your mother or father, grandmother or grandfather for "privacy".

    Those in China and S. Korea put their country, their lives and their economy above "privacy".
    Republicans are willing to sacrifice their country, their lives and their economy for some supposed privacy -- which they gave away 20 years ago in their Patriot Act anyway!

    Has anyone else bothered to read the documents that Apple/Google have made available describing the protocol and framework? It is helpful when one critiques the parties involved. The protocol preserves privacy while enabling robust contact tracing. Of course contact tracing does require participation. If you choose to not participate because of privacy concerns then you have the opportunity to PROVE why the protocol fails (who knows? it might). But I don't see anyone even attempting to provider such a proof.
    Yes, it does preserve privacy
    No, it does not do contact tracing (you might look up what the term means).   That is why they changed its name -- because it does not do contact tracing.

    OK, I believe I can see where you are coming from. Yes, the way it is designed it is clearly an opt-in system. First you can choose not to use it all. Even if you use the system and you get tested positive you again get to choose to notify and you need verification by medical personnel that you did indeed test positive.

    Assuming those conditions are met and the devices register that transmission of the virus was possible, you get notification that you were exposed and should self-quarantine and get tested. You are not informed who, where, or when about the event but you do learn of the exposure. I am sure it does not fit the detailed description of contact tracing that has been around before and is massively labor intensive and privacy invasive and completely hopeless for notifying people you don't even know but were possibly exposed. Even among people you know expecting exhaustive recall over a possibly extended period is asking a lot.

    The clear advantage of exposure detection is that it doesn't depend on possibly faulty memory or knowing everyone's identity just in case they might need to be notified some time in the future. Exposure detection does depend on participation but it is cost free and exhaustively vigilant. There could be a cost for periodic virus testing but that should be provided cost free by the state if there is any rationality at all.

    Conventional contact tracing for sexually transmitted diseases makes more sense because you really should know the identities (and when and where) of persons who need to be contacted. For something as insidious as Covid-19 it is a different game.
    gatorguy
  • Contact tracing app vetted by Apple found to share data with Foursquare and Google

    command_f said:
    lkrupp said:
    Anyone who downloads and installs these contact tracing apps should have their heads examined. We can’t trust ANY of these bastards, including Apple.
    Really? I trust Apple (beyond the usual errors that everyone makes), mostly because their motives are clear. At worst, it's not in their selfish interest not to protect our data. You have to pick who you trust but you do have to pick someone; if not, bin that smart phone, and the feature phone, because the network tracks them all. They kind-of have to, of course, so they can deliver your calls to you.

    As to "these tracing apps", they aren't all the same. The Apple/Google framework is yet to be released* so it can't have failed already, the UK's NHS app uses entirely an different implementation and they've open-sourced their software so that the ethical hackers can help them improve it.

    You can't use the fact that one app sounds as though it's dodgy to condemn the whole class. That's like saying Android phones are poor so iPhones must be too.

    *My bad: it was released yesterday. I think my point still stands.
    Yes, Apple's motives are clear:   promote privacy above all else.  And normally that is a good thing.

    But, in this case, putting privacy above all else means putting it above the lives of tens of thousands --- because a lack of effective testing  & follow-up tracing means death to tens of thousands.  Are you willing to sacrifice your own life or the life of your mother or father, grandmother or grandfather for "privacy".

    Those in China and S. Korea put their country, their lives and their economy above "privacy".
    Republicans are willing to sacrifice their country, their lives and their economy for some supposed privacy -- which they gave away 20 years ago in their Patriot Act anyway!

    Has anyone else bothered to read the documents that Apple/Google have made available describing the protocol and framework? It is helpful when one critiques the parties involved. The protocol preserves privacy while enabling robust contact tracing. Of course contact tracing does require participation. If you choose to not participate because of privacy concerns then you have the opportunity to PROVE why the protocol fails (who knows? it might). But I don't see anyone even attempting to provider such a proof.
    watto_cobracommand_f