octave

Still cant be done in every occupation. I just heard that the meat processing plant outbreak was detected when a worker with a severed thumb was taken to Sunshine hospital where he later started to develop symptoms. If his exposure had been detected before he became symptomatic it would have save many new infections. This is the whole point of the app, we need to identify potential infections before they become symptomatic. The mother of one of my music students tested positive yesterday. Luckily for me I am working online at the moment. More than likely she will have infected some of her family members. In this case knowing before it becomes symptomatic would be advantageous. I find it hard to understand the resistance to the app given what it could possibly do to reduce the spread and reduce the length of this disruption.

There are many jobs where close contact is a part of the job, mine for example. Lifting the lockdown will not mean a return to normality. People need to start to feel confident that the are unlikely to get covid. The first wave of this disease was somewhat contained by the lockdown but there will be a second wave as in other countries. We need to catch and trace new infections early. From time to time citizens of a country are asked to make some kind of contribution, in the past this may have been going to war as an extreme example. Here what we are being asked for has potential benefits for the individual but also for society as a whole. I am aware that some people dont have smart phones or live in an isolated location. Whilst 100% would be good it is still projected to do some good at a lower rate. I want to get back to work and my employer wants me to get back to work but being in a category to puts me at far greater risk I am just not willing to go back unless all steps that can be taken have taken. Lifting lockdown will not solve much once the figures begin to climb again and people begin to self isolate. We have to throw everything we can at this illness otherwise it will be an ongoing hit to the economy until a vaccine is found, although of course the anti vax mob will think that is a government plot. The benefits of tracking down infections before people are symptoms are obvious. The benefits of mass testing are obvious. The privacy issues seem trivial and no practical examples have been presented here. If I had anxieties about this app I would be ditching about 20 other apps.

I certainly wont go back to my job if unless everything possible is done to reduce my risk. In my job (private studio music teacher) work is offered to the teacher who best suits the particular student. Interestingly I have just finished an online teaching session of 10 students in a row although one didn't show, after a phone call I found that the child's mother has just tested positive and is pretty unwell. Would be interesting to know what responsibility an employer has to provide a safe workplace.

I respect your right not to download it if you are anxious but the choice for me is a rational one. Apart from being able to get back to face to face work with a slightly higher level of confidence that I will be informed early and therefore can be treated early if i come into contact with it, it will also facilitate my visiting of my father who is approaching his end and in a home that is just starting to come out of lockdown. I will need a flu vaccination and the app if I am to visit him. I believe my choice is rational given the circumstances. I have much more to gain than I have to lose. I believe as a society we also have more to gain than to lose in terms of controlling this disease without giving up too much personal freedom. As you say we are being tracked by many many organizations and businesses and yet we seldom run into catastrophic problems and at least this app is for the very best of reasons. Whilst I am not an IT expert I do have many in the family and some of them are cynics but not one of them has concerns over the way this app works. I am not anxiuos about having this app on my phone whilst the need exists.

Onetrack, is this app really and honestly riskier than any other app you use? Do you use internet banking? If you are worried about hacking then why even carry a phone? There are clear benefits in terms of contact tracing and early notification. The anxious folk have so far only provided vague scenarios about it being hacked or misused but have so far not acknowledge the benefits.This is an argument against all apps and indeed all of our internet use. I do not think the government should make it mandatory as some countries have but I fully support the right of any business owner to insist upon it for their workers. I know when I return to face to face work I will be required to have it. Not only will it be required of me, I want to have it anyway, anything that can tip the risk balance in my favour is worth it to me. We know that with the easing of restrictions there will be a second wave. Isolation is a crude and extreme way of dealing with it. We live in a modern technological society where we have modern tools at our disposal. We need to do everything we can to get back to normal. I acknowledge that we need to be vigilant but I believe that our concern must be rational and proportional.

[

I consider myself to be rational and practical. The argument against seems to be mainly base on anxiety about what this could be used for in the future. These are worthwhile points to consider but there is a difference between healthy evidence based critiques an anxiety and cynicism. Just expand on my previous PRACTICAL reasons for using the app are these: My 92 year old father is in aged care interstate. The last time I visited him was in the early days of covid. Since then the home has been in lockdown and even my mother has been unable to visit. Visits will shortly resume for restricted hours and my mother has been told that she will need to prove that she has had a flu vaccine and it is strongly recommend that she have the app installed. I would assume that if I visit from interstate I will need both of these things. I have no problem complying with this. We newknow from the Newmarch house incident that infection in an aged care facility is disastrous. The benefits to me massively outweigh any possible privacy downside. When I go there I will most likely get a flight there, I will share this aircraft with perhaps 100 other people each one of whom may be presymptomatic but contagious, again the possible benefits for me at least outweigh the cons. Although I am semi retired I still work as a part time as a music teacher in a private studio. At the moment i am teaching online but the studio owner would like to resume face to face lessons asap. I consider this job to be high risked given close contact in a small room and being wind instruments a considerable amount of spit. I will only resume face to face if all possible precautions are taken. I believe the owner intends to only offer work to those who are willing to take all precautions. I suspect that it wont become mandatory in a legal sense but that many business owners may seek to protect their business by all means at their disposal. Imagine an engineering firm with perhaps 100 employees after they resume work in the next week or so. What a disaster it would be if the infection ran through the business, it would be as bad or as worse as another lockdown period. There are different methods of keeping the infection rate down but ultimately it is about preventing those who have or have been exposed coming incontact with those who haven't. Lockdown has been successful here but it can't go on forever and there will be a second wave. We can deal with this in several ways but lockdown is not the most desirable way. Regarding the example of someone getting hold of my phone, I can tell you that this app would be the least of my anxieties way down the list from the log in to my bank or super account or email. Al of these things contain sensitive data. It is important to be ever vigilant when it comes to the creeping loss of privacy but I would consider this particular app to be pretty benign when it comes to invasion of privacy. There are plenty of things we all do every day that open us up to greater potential danger. How many people anxious about this use a VPN, how many people are anxious or suspicious are fine with the PBS? The government if they wish could find out what drugs we take. Each visit to a doctor generates a medicare record. We are relaxed about these things because they are not new and they allow us to pay reasonable prices for our medication and medical treatment. It is about cost and benefit, pros and cons. No one has yet presented practical cons other than battery life and the fact that some people don't have a smartphone (I don't think 100% coverage is needed or expected.) I have no problem with people who have decided not to download and i also have no problem with business owners insisting on it for their employees.

I guess this is what is being referred to. Census 2016: Government, IBM settle over website crash Not exactly a security issue as I remember it. It is important not the throw the baby out with the bathwater. Any app or government program will have pros and cons. If I go into a bank I will be recorded by cctv. My phone location information is used to detect traffic and many more things like this. These all have costs and benefits. In many of these things we are not given a choice but on the whole we do our own cost benefit analysis and accept the idea or not. I have given practical examples of how this app could have reduced or prevented bad outcomes such as Newmarch house but no one has given any practical examples of things that could happen because of the app. As the lockdown is relaxed there will be spikes in infections and how quickly these spikes are detected and dealt with will play into future lockdowns. It is imperative that when someone tests positive all of their contacts are found if we are to return to normality.

Hopefully soon I will be able to go back to my favourite coffee shop If one of the other patrons should test positive then I can be notified and seek treatment early and also avoid passing it on to others. I would of course be aware of friends I had been in contact with but how could I know the patrons of the local cafe If we are to return to normality contact tracing will be crucial. Other countries are doing similar things and even using credit card transactions to locate people who may have come into contact with an infected person. I have many aps on my phone that require much more information.

Yes it is and should be voluntary. No one does have to explain why or why not although the original poster posed the question "have you downloaded and why or why not" I don't think the question is out of line and it is not mandatory to take part in the conversation.

So what do you fear could happen to you if you download it?

So the app has been reverse engineered. For those who interested in the details. COVIDSafe - Initial Analysis Being in a vulnerable category my self interest in knowing as soon as possible outweighs any paranoa I may have. But even more important than that is what I would see as my duty to protect others. Consider the 11 deaths at Newmarch House which started when a nurse with mild symptoms worked for 6 days. Had there been wide spread use of the app just maybe this would have been detected. Other than the deaths I am sure this has ruined this nurses life. Sometimes we are called upon to make some kind of sacrifice for the good of the country or others. As far as sacrifices go, unless I am missing something this is not huge. No one here has yet to put forward practical a negative consequences of using this app. I do understand that it is important to be ever vigilant against creeping surveillance but this seems like a pidlling example compared other things we routinely do. It is of course up to everyone to make their own rational decision but for me other than self interest, if I can do something which could help others and if the price of doing this is not catastrophic, then this is what I will do.

Shoddy statistics and false claims: Dr. Erickson dangerously misled the public on coronavirus

The way it works is that you go about your business under the assumption that you don't have it, later you start to get symptoms so you get tested. At this point the app can be analyzed so that the people (that have the app) that you have come into contact with whilst you were contagious but asymptomatic can be traced and quarantined so that they don't continue the chain of infection This is the thing that makes this disease worse than others the fact you are contagious before you get symptoms

I have absolutely no problem with anyone who does not wish to install the app. One reason I have the app is that being in a high risk category I would rather know asap if I have been close to someone who turns out to be infected. This is a practical reason for me even if it is very far from perfect. I have to weigh this up against the practical down sides. No one really has articulated the in practice what the down sides are, other than a non specific mistrust of government. Life is full of compromises. Again I have no problem with those who chose not to but for me the pros outweigh the cons.

I think it comes from a statistical analysis of how long people who have become infected spent in the presence of an infected person. The same applies to the distance of 1.5 metres. This does not mean it is impossible to catch it at less than 15 minutes or at more than 1.5 metres just statistically unlikely. Live viruses have been found on door knobs but this does not mean it is a likely source of infection. The chance of catching it is a sliding scale, there is no precise time or distance just an icreasing chance with proxity and time.

If your phone is on it can be tracked. I guess the questions is why would anyone bother. Two cars passing would not register as they are not within 1.5 metres for more than 15 minutes.

I think it comes down to the fact that it is unlikely to be infected by one individual virus. I read that statistically it is rare but not impossible to be infected in short interaction. I guess it could also be possible for a sneeze to travel more than 1.5 metres. I think it all comes down to probabilities.

My understanding is that it does not require mobile phone coverage. It works by bluetooth and detects another phone that also has the app. If these 2 phones are within 1.5 meters for more then 15 minutes this is recorded on both phones. If I get infected then I am asked if I will allow the data to be accessed but I beleive it is no mandatory.

I have downloaded it because I think ultimately it will contribute to us being able to get back to some kind of normality. In a personal sense if I end up being less than 1.5 meters away from someone who is infected I for more than 15 minutes I would like to know about it. I would also like to know that I could play a part in allowing someone who had been near me being informed if I turned out to be infected. Just about everything we do comes with costs and benefits and personally I believe the benefit outweighs the cost. I am certainly open to a well constructed factual argument about the possible negative outcomes to using the app but "I don't trust the government" is a bit vague and non specific. We provide much more detailed data every day whether it be using the internet or buying prescription medications or even just carrying our mobile phone around with us

Generally I agree with the right to endanger one's own life however it is not that simple. We know that people are contagious before they are symptomatic therefore it is difficult to confine the risk solely to that individual. Why should medical staff risk their own health or even lives (and their family) to save people who are too thick or selfish to do what the rest of are doing.

Agreed but I think at the time the only people taking it seriously were epidemiologists and virologists. Some people including some on this forum think there is no problem even now so they certainly would have been bleating if the borders had been closed back when the only known cases were in China. I am not an expert in this field so I can only read and evaluate what the experts think. Unfortunately we live in times where people believe that their lay persons opinion is of a higher quality than people in these fields.

Of course but even with a high density the disease can only spread by people coming into contact. A high population density combined with strict distancing rules will produce less transmission than a country with a low density where people associate closely. Other factors include testing rates. There are many examples of countries with high population densities that have done well eg Taiwan, Singapore, Japan, South Korea. I think the evidence would strongly suggest that if we had not curtailed physical contact the transmission rate would have been much greater. A lot is know about the transmission rates. We know the R0 number. We know how it spreads.

The population density of Australia as a whole mat be low but surely we can compare our individual cites to similar cities.

Whilst not perfect the figures speak for themselves compared to other countries. It is quite easy in hindsight to say what should have been done but no country immediately closed its borders. Which countries response should we have copied? The economy was always going to take a hit by the necessary shutdown of the tourism industry. I think that we will recover economically quicker than those countries who have not taken firm action. The next year or two will tell if this is correct.