Who is tracking me on my devices?

[Bootstrap]

So, if I'm understanding this, it seems to me all the difference between whether a method of contact tracing is considered "anonymous" or not depends on whether or not the data collected is sent to a central database where it can be used by third parties. In that case it would be centralized contact tracing. The other method of contact tracing (what you're referring to as "anonymized") would be referred to as decentralized contact tracing. An example would be data could be kept on a phone for so many days or weeks then rolled off, but not sent to any centralized data base.

Yes, there are those different methods.

There are other possibilities. For instance, you can have a QR that identifies the store, bar, restaurant, etc, and have people scan it with an app in order to enter the establishment. That app can check a central database that contains dates and locations where Covid-19 contact is likely to have occurred, altering the individuals who were there.

Or an app on a cell phone can generate a QR that contains only an anonymous private identifier and Covid vaccination and test status. This anonymouis private identifier can be placed in a central database without any identifying information, the app can check to see if its identifier was in a place of concern. The identifier need not be constant, new ones can be generated as needed to make them harder to trace. For the sake of transparency, the QR code should not include any encrypted data so that the user can read it with a QR reader and know what it contains.

And for what it's worth, even a system that notes who was where when is no worse than what happens every time you use a credit card to make a purchase. Or carry your cellphone to a location without turning off geolocation and using privacy settings. I think we should want transparent systems for contact tracing, with privacy in mind, but I also think the public health benefit of contact tracing is important - not only for Covid, but in case we encounter something even more serious. I think we should be concerned about privacy, but most people are leaking so much private data everywhere they go that Covid doesn't seem like the most important privacy issue to me. I find it odd that it is being singled out.

And I find it odd that the conspiracy theories aren't mostly about the much more serious privacy issues that I mentioned earlier in this thread. If we really worry about a police state, why don't we worry about those things more?

I haven't spent any time on what Australia is doing, you seem to be pointing to what China is doing and saying that Australia is doing the same thing because they both use QR codes. I don't know if that's true or not, I generally don't think Australia is like China. I do know how QR codes work and various ways they might be used. Some of these would concern me, others would not.

My understanding is China and Australia are both using centralized contact tracing methods. These aren't necessarily tyrannical, it depends on how they're being used.

Yes, it does depend on how it is being used. Like all uses of information, really. Who is storing what information, who is it available to, how is it being used? And in China, at this point, it really is tyrannical. No question about that. I don't know whether or not to be concerned about Australia, I haven't looked at it carefully. For me, that takes time and energy. I know a little more about Germany, which I'm not too concerned about, at least not yet.

[ohio jones]

For instance, you can have a QR that identifies the store, bar, restaurant, etc, and have people scan it with an app in order to enter the establishment. That app can check a central database that contains dates and locations where Covid-19 contact is likely to have occurred, altering the individuals who were there.

I have serious objections to being altered by a database. But the problem with checking at the time of entering is that the infected person may not develop symptoms or be diagnosed until days later; in order to follow up and alert potential contacts, the data has to be stored somewhere and refreshed periodically.

Having been in Germany twice in the last six months, most restaurants, museums, and other venues that participate in contact tracing provide a paper alternative to Luca (the most common app). The doorkeeper doesn't look at these, just puts them in a stack in case follow-up is needed later. I don't really object to this type of system, though its effectiveness can be questioned. I'm not sure all of the forms I filled out would actually enable them to contact me.

[Bootstrap]

For instance, you can have a QR that identifies the store, bar, restaurant, etc, and have people scan it with an app in order to enter the establishment. That app can check a central database that contains dates and locations where Covid-19 contact is likely to have occurred, altering the individuals who were there.

I have serious objections to being altered by a database.

Wish I could type ;->

Yes, I meant "alerting". And they should keep that scalpel away from you.

But the problem with checking at the time of entering is that the infected person may not develop symptoms or be diagnosed until days later; in order to follow up and alert potential contacts, the data has to be stored somewhere and refreshed periodically.

Right. So something has to be stored somewhere - either on the user's phone, in a database, whatever. But it doesn't have to be stored for a long time - if there is a Covid-19 spread, it will happen within a month. So you can also have a policy for deleting this data.

Having been in Germany twice in the last six months, most restaurants, museums, and other venues that participate in contact tracing provide a paper alternative to Luca (the most common app). The doorkeeper doesn't look at these, just puts them in a stack in case follow-up is needed later. I don't really object to this type of system, though its effectiveness can be questioned. I'm not sure all of the forms I filled out would actually enable them to contact me.

Here's how Luca does it:

luca ensures a data protection-compliant, decentralized encryption of your data, undertakes the obligation to record contact data for events and gastronomy, relieves the health authorities through digital, lean, and integrated processes to enable efficient and complete tracing. The app can be used with the area of Germany.

App functions

Generation of secure QR codes
luca takes over the secure transmission of contact data to event organizers and operators of bars, restaurants, or cultural sites. All you share at check-in are QR codes that venue operators can’t associate with you.

Contactless and secure data transfer
When guests enter an event or restaurant, they have their secure QR code scanned and are thus checked in. The data about your stay is additionally encrypted. The host can’t read this data at any time, which means that you always retain your data sovereignty.

Data release to the health authorities
Only the responsible health authority can read out the relevant encrypted data with a security key – but only if you release your data for the readout.

Check in log view
You can view the history of your check-ins at any time. If the public health department wants to read your data, they need your permission first.

Import of vaccination and test results
To facilitate access to locations, it is possible to import and display vaccination and test results into luca. Information about the documents is only stored locally.

Automatic deletion of data
Your encrypted data will be automatically deleted at the latest 4 weeks after visiting the event or venue.

[Falco Underhill]

I want to make clear that I have little doubt all these "kinks" in the various vaccine passport systems will be worked out. We get talking about privacy issues etc and eventually it all gets worked out so that no personal data is shared with the wrong individuals or corporate entities and the whole thing becomes "safe."

Eventually there will be a standardized system across all parties that works for everybody.

My suspicion/contention is and has been this vaccine passport system is only meant to form the backbone/structure of some universal social credit type system. Getting that system in place is the thing. It's being done in the name of having to communicate orders throughout all of society when a worldwide emergency ( like a pandemic) strikes. As some new emergency could happen at any time - the argument goes - it's better to have an emergency system already in place so we don't have to start over for the next one.

So it will become permanent. The vaccine has always been just a pretext for putting the system together in the first place.

Our concern about the kinks and privacy issues is just what they want. We're just very helpfully cooperating in the job of putting it all together for them.

So I'm going to get away from this subject for a while, happy to be dismissed as some whacky conspiracy crank and to drop by once in a while just to say ... "I told you so!"

[Josh]

Boot,

Do you not see any concerns with creating a federal social credit system and then requiring people to participate in order to do things like go to the grocery store?

[ohio jones]

[Bootstrap]

Reordering some of your statements to organize my response ...

My suspicion/contention is and has been this vaccine passport system is only meant to form the backbone/structure of some universal social credit type system. Getting that system in place is the thing.

So it will become permanent. The vaccine has always been just a pretext for putting the system together in the first place.

But that system is already in place - credit cards, the international banking system, the Internet, cell phone tracking. What does vaccination status add that makes a difference? If they know who you are, where you live, where you have been, what you shopped for online, what your financial transactions are, if they can put a hold on your credit cards and bank accounts or send a drone in your direction ... these are the things we aren't talking about much. Suppose, given all that, we elect a leader who says "the president can do whatever he wants", ignoring the legal barriers that keep his hand off of these things. Suppose his followers strenuously object to any investigation or any limitation on his powers. Suppose he manages to make national law enforcement, intelligence, and the military comply with his orders.

... why are you so concerned that someone might also know what vaccines you have taken? That just doesn't make sense to me. If someone wants to track you, existing sources give them everything they need. And I doubt that there will be a global system for this, privacy rules are so different from one country to another. I am much more concerned with people getting rid of the guard rails on the presidency.

And "pretext"? So far, 780,000 Americans have died due to Covid. This is life-and-death stuff.

So I'm going to get away from this subject for a while, happy to be dismissed as some whacky conspiracy crank and to drop by once in a while just to say ... "I told you so!"

Sure. Do you have specific predictions? And a specific time frame? So we can know if you were right or wrong?

[Bootstrap]

Do you not see any concerns with creating a federal social credit system and then requiring people to participate in order to do things like go to the grocery store?

I do see concerns, but I also see concerns with people who refuse to get vaccinated, refuse to wear masks, do not believe that Covid-19 exists, and insist on their personal right to risk the lives of others. There are people who will not be able to safely shop under those circumstances, especially the elderly and immuno-compromised.

These concerns need to be balanced. How we balance these concerns is going to differ from country to country. Regardless, the very real civil liberty concerns are important. A pandemic is a little like martial law - if some enemy came and killed 780,000 Americans in this country we would mobilize, and this would affect some rights we normally expect in peacetime. Whenever that happens, someone needs to be thinking about how we make sure that doesn't go overboard. Declaring martial law can be a step on the way to a military dictatorship. There must be safeguards.

[GaryK]

Do you not see any concerns with creating a federal social credit system and then requiring people to participate in order to do things like go to the grocery store?

I do see concerns, but I also see concerns with people who refuse to get vaccinated, refuse to wear masks, do not believe that Covid-19 exists, and insist on their personal right to risk the lives of others. There are people who will not be able to safely shop under those circumstances, especially the elderly and immuno-compromised.

I know there are immuno-compromised people that may not be able to get vaccinated but what's to keep the elderly from getting vaccinated? Is it not safe for elderly people to go shopping after being vaccinated?

[Bootstrap]

I know there are immuno-compromised people that may not be able to get vaccinated but what's to keep the elderly from getting vaccinated? Is it not safe for elderly people to go shopping after being vaccinated?

Here's the problem as I see it: Vaccination helps an elderly person be a whole lot safer than an unvaccinated elderly person, but even with a vaccination, an elderly person is less safe than an unvaccinated teenager. The same is true for some immunocompromised people even with a vaccination. So a little consideration is a good thing.

FWIW, I spent some time on cortico-steroids earlier this year due a medical condition, and was very aware of that I was probably immunocompromised. I stayed out of situations I did not trust. I kept distance. I wore a KN-95. And there were people around me who clearly did not take the disease seriously, who mocked these precautions, who kind of stared at me. I chose shopping times when the stores were less crowded.