command_f

About

Username
command_f
Joined
Visits
73
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
516
Badges
0
Posts
422

Reactions

345Like37Informative

  • UK 'racing' to improve contact tracing privacy without Apple and Google

    command_fcommand_f
    seanj said:
    darkpaw said:
    Reasons why I'm not going to use this app:

    - The development of the app was given to a specific company. It was not sent out to tender. Now, you can argue that we don't have a lot of time and we needed it developed quickly, BUT...
    - The reported budget for the app was £250 MILLION... (Not sure on the veracity of that figure, but it's been widely reported. It may just be part of the deal between UK.gov and Palantir/Faculty.)
    - It is being developed by both Palantir (run by the right-wing billionaire Peter Thiel) and Faculty...
    - Faculty is an AI startup run by someone called Marc Warner...
    - Marc Warner's brother is Ben Warner...
    - Ben Warner was recruited to Downing Street by Dominic Cummings (if you don't who DC is, he's basically an unelected advisor to our inimitable dickwad, Boris Johnson)...
    - Ben Warner was instrumental in the Vote Leave campaign.

    Further:
    - Dr Ian Levy is Technical Director of the National Cyber Security Centre. He put out a blog post pretty much saying, "Everything is fine. We won't grab your data, no-sireeeee, and we absolutely won't expand the remit of this app, until we absolutely feel the need to do exactly that". Within hours, NHSX said they'll expand the remit of the app where necessary. So-called "mission creep".
    - The app ONLY works for NHS England, so spending any time with someone from, say, Wales or Scotland, won't work because they won't be using the NHS England app; they'll be using the NHS Wales or NHS Scotland app.
    - The app will NOT work with the Apple/Google solution which means if you go abroad, neither your device nor anyone else's will match, so will record zero interactions.

    So, no. I won't be downloading this app.

    The Apple/Google solution would've been exactly what we needed, and it works across borders. Apple even provided the source code necessary to create a functioning app. Sadly, our government thinks it's the dog bollox when it comes to everything, so they've gone off on their own.

    You wonder why the UK currently has the highest number of Covid-19 deaths in Europe? Because our government is pathetic. Our MPs are idiots. Our Health Secretary, Matt Hancock, said he wanted to test 100,000 people a day by the end of April. 30th April comes along and lo and behold we hit 122,000 tests! Oh, sorry, no, we hit 76,000 tests. The other 46,000 tests were actually just mailed out and hadn't actually been used. They did this to save his political career. In the days following the 30th April we tested 66,000 people then 56,000 people.

    The UK is an f-ing joke.
    Ladies and gentlemen, we have a conspiracy theorist in the house! This is the kind of vitriolic fake news communists in the U.K. spout all the time these days. Not surprisingly the public voted for Brexit, destroyed their party in the recent general election, and why the government has the highest poll ratings and confidence ever.
    We (in the UK) seem to be developing the same trait that I see in the US: we automatically assume that everything the government, civil service or any other authority does must be wrong/useless/vindictive. We all like to moan, it's therapeutic after all, but it's important to be level-headed about serious issues. Creating or spreading fake news  is not sensible, particularly about this worldwide crisis.

    So I agree with Seanj and I urge everyone to check so-called facts before repeating them. The problem with conspiracy theories is that they appeal with their apparent simplicity and the opportunity to say "You're naive, I know better than you". They are also impossible to disprove because conspiracy theorists simply reject all contrary evidence as being part of the conspiracy. So, hot news: the Tooth Fairy is real, all those parents are lying about where the coins came from and you try proving me wrong  ;).

    I think it's best not to bring Brexit into this though. I do believe it's real, however unlikely it seems, and I do believe we're stuck with it now.
    williamlondonelijahg

  • UK 'racing' to improve contact tracing privacy without Apple and Google

    command_fcommand_f
    darkpaw said:

    command_f said:
    There is a privacy concern but, here and now, there are lives at stake. Later on, there must be a robust discussion on how the tracing is going to stop and the data be protected from non-covid analyses.
    The government will use this crisis as leverage to make people install it. They're already doing it with the "Stay Home. Protect the NHS. Save Lives" slogan. Stay home or you'll adversely affect the NHS and kill people.

    I'm totally in favour of the lockdown. I understand the need for it, and I'm not one of those crazy people who wants to nip out for a suntan. I just do not trust the UK government.
    For better or worse, are you really not going to run it and support easing the lockdown and saving lives because there might be a small (or even big) privacy impact later?
    Yes. There is a viable solution that doesn't have these privacy concerns, and Apple/Google have made the source code available for a working app. NHSX could've used it, but chose not to because they think they're better. They wilfully caused these concerns to flare up. The onus is on them to allay these concerns and to remove our data when we request it. We shouldn't have to wait months and years for an amendment on a Bill to go through the HoC to decide when their app respects our privacy; you build it in from the start.
    "The government will use this crisis as leverage to make people install it. ". Indeed, they wouldn't be doing it if we weren't in this situation.

    "    There is a viable solution that doesn't have these privacy concerns,". Well, the app developers will use the Apple/Google technology or, as seems more likely, not. The only choice for you and I will be whether we use what they produce...or not.

    So, in the warts and all reality in which we find ourselves, not the different reality that could have happened but didn't, I ask again:     are you really not going to run it and support easing the lockdown and saving lives because there might be a small (or even big) privacy impact later? 'Cos that's the decision we're all going to have to take.
    williamlondon

  • UK 'racing' to improve contact tracing privacy without Apple and Google

    command_fcommand_f
    When Lewis Carroll had the Queen of Hearts say "Sentence first, verdict afterwards" in Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, he was being satirical. I think it's a little early to write-off the NHS app when it has yet to start its large scale testing.

    I urge those commenting on this to read the Ian Levy article before leaping to conclusions. For starters, the NHS app works keeps all contact data on device until (and unless) the user chooses to report that they are unwell -  just like the Apple/Google solution. The data then reported doesn't contain location data except a manual, broad approximation to your home address (there's no GPS data), all the identities are anonymised (like Apple/Google). If you don't believe the data stays on device then ponder how long it will take someone to discover if it is reporting data without user choice.

    The difference is in the processing where the NHS app, at the expense of a potential privacy impact from holding anonymised data centrally, can do more analysis of how the virus affects the population. You need to go to the last page of the supporting document to read what this is but, essentially, the centralised data allows analysis of the spread from the perspective of the contacts with the reporting (sick) person, not just the reporting person; it is intuitively clear that this is more powerful.

    There is a privacy concern but, here and now, there are lives at stake. Later on, there must be a robust discussion on how the tracing is going to stop and the data be protected from non-covid analyses.

    I share concerns over the practicality of the app using Bluetooth whilst in background: if they haven't got a decent solution to this then they really have screwed up. However, AI reported on 27th April (Britain's NHS rejects the Apple & Google COVID-19 exposure notification technology):
    "Engineers have met several core challenges for the app to meet public health needs," an NHSX spokeswoman told the BBC, "and support detection of contact events sufficiently well, including when the app is in the background, without excessively affecting battery life."
    and:
    The BBC notes that Apple and Google have supported the British team, and NHSX's own statement repeats that. "We are working with Apple and Google on their welcome support for tracing apps around the world,".

    And suppose that all this is not (quite) true: this will be the only app usable in the UK. For better or worse, are you really not going to run it and support easing the lockdown and saving lives because there might be a small (or even big) privacy impact later? I'm Mr Paranoid when it comes to giving up my data (I don't use Facebook, as a random example) but we live in exceptional times and I shall be making an exception here, even if HMG might screw up later.
    seanjwilliamlondon

  • Apple removes Siri team lead as part of AI strategy shift

    command_fcommand_f
    I played with Alexa the other day on a friend's Sonos: I was impressed and amused. I have never been impressed by Siri. The actual speech parsing is good but the reaction to so many enquiries is just to display a web page on the display; this defeats the object in many cases. A rethink is overdue if Apple intends to compete in this area.
    ravnorodomScot1qwweratyler82kitatitpatchythepirateJWSC

  • Rumor claims 2019 iPhone will get 10MP TrueDepth camera, stick to Lightning

    command_fcommand_f
    command_f said:
    I think the Lightning connector is physically superior to USB-C (having used an all-USB-C MBP since late 2016). I do see the need for USB-3 speeds, especially when setting-up a new phone or pad, but I continue to believe that Apple could engineer that into Lightning in a backwards-compatible fashion.

    Putting USB-C on the other end of the cable seems more important to me. With my MBP 2 years old and Apple's apparent drive for USB-C, I couldn't believe that my new iPhone XS needed a dongle to connect to my MBP. So let's have a brave drive for the future at the charger/host end of the cable first.
    You do not require a ”dongle” to plug the XS into your MBP, you simply need a cable. 
    You are technically correct of course. The point is that what comes in the box is not interoperable: a MacBook Pro and iPhone XS, out of their respective boxes, cannot be connected using the cable supplied. I said dongle because, living in the real world with a laptop, I have found essential, and bought, a USB-A dongle (well, two actually). I have also now bought a USB-C to Lightning cable.

    If Apple believes that USB-C is the future (and the MBP, plus statements at its launch, suggest that they do) then why does the iPhone, two generations later, not come with a USB-C charger and cable? Or with a USB-C cable in addition to the USB-A one (which would be analogous to the inclusion of a headphone dongle with previous generation iPhones).

    It's not the cost at issue, it's the lack of system thinking and integrated ecosystem that used to be a hallmark of Apple kit (the "it just works" bit)  Transitions are always difficult but Apple doesn't seem to be consistent on this one.
    retrogustomuthuk_vanalingamboogerman2000