Quote Originally Posted by CCFCC3PO View Post
You have valid points, but my understanding is that you can't simply sign up with a bogus account. You have to enter the details of your doctor for one thing.

I am aware that some people are suggesting it is a bad idea - I suspect if you look solely for that your fears on the app will be confirmed. Similar fears are raised about things like Facebook, Twitter, e-mail, smart phones, and even traffic apps like Waze. I reckon many of the people calling this out as a bad idea are already anti-Government, and I reckon a high percentage of them use some of the other apps that have been proven to collect data (i.e. Facebook).

Do you have a link to the story about the app using GPS data in the future?
It was a statement attributed to the ceo of nhsx Matthew Gould, I don't have it to hand. Might have been on wired.co.uk.

I am not saying people will sign up with fake details, I am saying the app relies on a user initially accurately self-diagnosing. I used to work with someone who thought they had a brain tumor every time they got a headache. What will they do if they feel a bit hot, or wake up coughing in the morning, my guess is straight on the app to say they have symptoms and if you have been near them recently for any length of time you are getting an alert saying that you may have been exposed and so on and so on... Tracing should be done after diagnosis, the effort should be placed on speeding up testing so that this can take place quickly and effectively.

Three separate issues for me I suppose.

1) I don't think the app will achieve what they hope it will, even if enough people decide to use it. The iPhone issues are not a good start.

2) Very real issues around privacy highlighted by legal and tech experts.

3) mixed messages around whether the data gets deleted once it is over, no plans to publish the code for expert scrutiny and scope creep - already we are hearing that the app might become more than just a contact tracer straight from the horses mouth.

And you are right, none of us are pure in terms of the data we have often unwittingly given away however you are wrong to highlight this in any way hypocritical because this isn't a discussion about whether or not you agree with the government or an organisation knowing things about us, this is a discussion about where you draw the line. If they said we can save you from heart attacks, you just need to put CCTV in your shower and let us watch, presumably you wouldn't think that was a measured and appropriate response to the risk of dropping dead from a heart attack.

We simply draw the line at different points.

Also I don't think it is valid for people to be continually reaching for the tired old 'if X were the government you would agree with it' because there is strong evidence to the contrary. When people strongly disagree with something they often do so regardless of political allegiance (the Iraq war being a pretty significant example that springs to mind). This government exists under a particularly dark cloud of skepticism in my mind simply because they find dishonesty so easy.