For all those horrified about giving up your information to the Gov't, @HYUFD approach is favoured overwhemingly in the polling.
Anyway it's either giving up your every movement to Crapita/G4S (The Gov't is bound to outsource the weeds of the system), lockdown or death.
There needs to be a high degree of consent for this programme to work. So you also make the effort to get people on board. There probably also needs to be a degree of compulsion to get the coverage. What form that compulsion takes has to be worked out, but the basic deal is that the system enables you conveniently to do activities that are prevented by lockdown.
And those that refuse will also go out doing those activities
There are a few ifs in this. But if the bulk of people accept contact apps enable more and safer activity and if the government applies the rules in an intelligent way, I think that group of refuseniks would be quite small.
percentage of over 65's in uk population is 18%, percentage of over 65's with a smartphone is 18% so there is already 14.76% of the population without an app.
Down a notch 55 to 65 45% dont have a smart phone I expect that to be another 8 to 9% of population added without an app almost at a quarter of people already
"80% of smartphone users" by definition won't include those who aren't smartphone users.
That's like discussing what percentage of children should be in school and saying "x% of the UK is over 18 and don't go to school".
Well in a few weeks if they ever release the tracking app we will see who is correct won't we. I still think under 50% take up
On SK I remember linking to their public websites in February showing the journeys and times each infected person had made so that people could heck if they had been exposed or not. Come May we have absolutely nothing like this. If we are going to make trace and isolate work we need it. That means accepting that your smartphone is used to track you and that information is put into the public domain, no doubt anonymised but probably identifiable to those who know you.
Are we ready for that? I am but I am not sure.
What has this government done to make its opponents trust it?
This would be a tough sell anyway and having a government led by figures who revel in playing fast and loose with data is only going to make it harder.
I think that Brits feel that way about every government. We have a healthy distrust of authority. Remember the arguments about ID cards under Blair? The question is whether enough people can be persuaded to take part. It has to be voluntary.
The issues with such an app are these:-
1. What is done with the information collected? 2. Who has access to it and what can they use it for? Not just information-sharing within the public sector but whether it is sold to private companies for private gain. 3. What are the controls on its use and how can we trust them? 4. How long is the information is held for and is it deleted once no longer needed? 5. The security of the app ie ensuring that it does not make hacking of other personal information / systems easier.
Similar issues arise with the Coronavirus Regulations - very oppressive legislation, passed in days. We need to keep a very close eye on them to make sure that they are repealed at the earliest possible time. Power grabs by authorities have a tendency to stay far beyond their sell by date, if we are not careful.
The data is recorded under an anonymous ID, rather than by the person's name.
If and when someone starts showing symptoms, or tests positive for Covid-19, they are able to share that on the app.
The app then sends a notification warning of possible infection to all those phone users to have come in requisite proximity recently....
What kind of mug would trust Johnson, Gove et al, you would have to be mentally deranged.
Funnily enough Nicola is outlining the same test trace isolate policy just now on Sky and it will be a key part but will need to combine safe distancing and use of masks. Also people will need to self isolate if they have been near a covid infection
Also increased testing and the use of a digital system. Proximity app is being led by UK government and is an important part of any system
To be fair Nicola is doing a good job
Maybe a bit more constructive comments Malc would add to the debate.
Nicola's trace, test, isolate policy will be a tremendous piece of Scottish ingenuity and a great idea not like chancer Boris's evil trace, track, isolate policy that will be almost identical.
Captain Darling : So you see, Blackadder, Field Marshall Haig is most anxious to eliminate all these German spies. General Melchett : Filthy hun weasels, fighting their dirty underhand war! Captain Darling : And fortunately, one of our spies... General Melchett : Splendid fellows, brave heroes risking life and limb for Blighty!
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
I'll be surprised if Apple doesn't close that exploit, as an app should only be able to make requests for background activity not force it by using an exploit. As soon as the NHS release the app that exploit will be in the wild, and Apple won't want others using it.
If the Apple version works as has been suggested, by using an exploit in IOS, it's not going to even make it as far as the App Store.
The Android version will have different problems, due to the huge number of device types and software versions out there there will be millions of phones on which it doesn't work correctly, if it works at all.
Not to mention the huge privacy implications, especially anything involving compulsion by government or effective compulsion by private organisations.
It will work on Android phones running Android 5.0 and above, which is about 95% of phones currently using the Google Play Store, and you need BLE support which I would expect to be almost as widely supported as it predates Android 5.0.
What makes you think it will work on 5.0, apparently the app the americans have only works on 6.0 onwards
That's what it said in the API documents.
No idea what the american app is using, but we do know that the uk one isn't going to use the api
Android 5.0 is when Google added BLE support to the OS. Google thinks that's enough to do contact tracing by proximity detection, and I can't see any obvious reason why centralised data collection would change that.
Because our public sector experts think they know better than the OS developers. It's going to be another disaster and we'll be wondering why Germany are doing so much better having asked Apple and Google to actively participate in their contact tracing app.
The lockdown is crumbling. My octogenarian neighbour has abandoned it. I changed the coil packs in her dead husband's E65 Beemer and she's just zigzagged off down the road to the supermarket in it.
You can jail a revolutionary but you can't jail a revolution, Malcolm X.
E65, nice...
730i so it's not a rocketship but the difference in the fit and finish between it and a modern BMW is immense and embarrassing. The interior is particularly good.
For all those horrified about giving up your information to the Gov't, @HYUFD approach is favoured overwhemingly in the polling.
Anyway it's either giving up your every movement to Crapita/G4S (The Gov't is bound to outsource the weeds of the system), lockdown or death.
There needs to be a high degree of consent for this programme to work. So you also make the effort to get people on board. There probably also needs to be a degree of compulsion to get the coverage. What form that compulsion takes has to be worked out, but the basic deal is that the system enables you conveniently to do activities that are prevented by lockdown.
And those that refuse will also go out doing those activities
There are a few ifs in this. But if the bulk of people accept contact apps enable more and safer activity and if the government applies the rules in an intelligent way, I think that group of refuseniks would be quite small.
percentage of over 65's in uk population is 18%, percentage of over 65's with a smartphone is 18% so there is already 14.76% of the population without an app.
Down a notch 55 to 65 45% dont have a smart phone I expect that to be another 8 to 9% of population added without an app almost at a quarter of people already
"80% of smartphone users" by definition won't include those who aren't smartphone users.
That's like discussing what percentage of children should be in school and saying "x% of the UK is over 18 and don't go to school".
Well in a few weeks if they ever release the tracking app we will see who is correct won't we. I still think under 50% take up
Even if it is around 40-50% that would still be a huge help for the tracking and tracing program. Obviously most effective the more people use it, but better than nothing.
On SK I remember linking to their public websites in February showing the journeys and times each infected person had made so that people could heck if they had been exposed or not. Come May we have absolutely nothing like this. If we are going to make trace and isolate work we need it. That means accepting that your smartphone is used to track you and that information is put into the public domain, no doubt anonymised but probably identifiable to those who know you.
Are we ready for that? I am but I am not sure.
What has this government done to make its opponents trust it?
This would be a tough sell anyway and having a government led by figures who revel in playing fast and loose with data is only going to make it harder.
I think that Brits feel that way about every government. We have a healthy distrust of authority. Remember the arguments about ID cards under Blair? The question is whether enough people can be persuaded to take part. It has to be voluntary.
The issues with such an app are these:-
1. What is done with the information collected? 2. Who has access to it and what can they use it for? Not just information-sharing within the public sector but whether it is sold to private companies for private gain. 3. What are the controls on its use and how can we trust them? 4. How long is the information is held for and is it deleted once no longer needed? 5. The security of the app ie ensuring that it does not make hacking of other personal information / systems easier.
Similar issues arise with the Coronavirus Regulations - very oppressive legislation, passed in days. We need to keep a very close eye on them to make sure that they are repealed at the earliest possible time. Power grabs by authorities have a tendency to stay far beyond their sell by date, if we are not careful.
The data is recorded under an anonymous ID, rather than by the person's name.
If and when someone starts showing symptoms, or tests positive for Covid-19, they are able to share that on the app.
The app then sends a notification warning of possible infection to all those phone users to have come in requisite proximity recently....
What kind of mug would trust Johnson, Gove et al, you would have to be mentally deranged.
Funnily enough Nicola is outlining the same test trace isolate policy just now on Sky and it will be a key part but will need to combine safe distancing and use of masks. Also people will need to self isolate if they have been near a covid infection
Also increased testing and the use of a digital system. Proximity app is being led by UK government and is an important part of any system
To be fair Nicola is doing a good job
Maybe a bit more constructive comments Malc would add to the debate.
Nicola's trace, test, isolate policy will be a tremendous piece of Scottish ingenuity and a great idea not like chancer Boris's evil trace, track, isolate policy that will be almost identical.
I think the more general view (mine certainly) is that there will be a much better chance of dicks not being in charge of it.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
For all those horrified about giving up your information to the Gov't, @HYUFD approach is favoured overwhemingly in the polling.
Anyway it's either giving up your every movement to Crapita/G4S (The Gov't is bound to outsource the weeds of the system), lockdown or death.
There needs to be a high degree of consent for this programme to work. So you also make the effort to get people on board. There probably also needs to be a degree of compulsion to get the coverage. What form that compulsion takes has to be worked out, but the basic deal is that the system enables you conveniently to do activities that are prevented by lockdown.
And those that refuse will also go out doing those activities
There are a few ifs in this. But if the bulk of people accept contact apps enable more and safer activity and if the government applies the rules in an intelligent way, I think that group of refuseniks would be quite small.
percentage of over 65's in uk population is 18%, percentage of over 65's with a smartphone is 18% so there is already 14.76% of the population without an app.
Down a notch 55 to 65 45% dont have a smart phone I expect that to be another 8 to 9% of population added without an app almost at a quarter of people already
"80% of smartphone users" by definition won't include those who aren't smartphone users.
That's like discussing what percentage of children should be in school and saying "x% of the UK is over 18 and don't go to school".
Well in a few weeks if they ever release the tracking app we will see who is correct won't we. I still think under 50% take up
Even 50% would make a massive difference. Plus the higher the take up the more likely others take it up (education and awareness will be higher) and the more effective it will be.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
"Apple bravely stands up to evil Tory Government using the virus as an excuse to spy on its citizens for nefarious purposes".
Says the headline in the Liberatarian News. Circulation @Pagan2 - and his dog
For all those horrified about giving up your information to the Gov't, @HYUFD approach is favoured overwhemingly in the polling.
Anyway it's either giving up your every movement to Crapita/G4S (The Gov't is bound to outsource the weeds of the system), lockdown or death.
There needs to be a high degree of consent for this programme to work. So you also make the effort to get people on board. There probably also needs to be a degree of compulsion to get the coverage. What form that compulsion takes has to be worked out, but the basic deal is that the system enables you conveniently to do activities that are prevented by lockdown.
And those that refuse will also go out doing those activities
There are a few ifs in this. But if the bulk of people accept contact apps enable more and safer activity and if the government applies the rules in an intelligent way, I think that group of refuseniks would be quite small.
percentage of over 65's in uk population is 18%, percentage of over 65's with a smartphone is 18% so there is already 14.76% of the population without an app.
Down a notch 55 to 65 45% dont have a smart phone I expect that to be another 8 to 9% of population added without an app almost at a quarter of people already
"80% of smartphone users" by definition won't include those who aren't smartphone users.
That's like discussing what percentage of children should be in school and saying "x% of the UK is over 18 and don't go to school".
Well in a few weeks if they ever release the tracking app we will see who is correct won't we. I still think under 50% take up
Even if it is around 40-50% that would still be a huge help for the tracking and tracing program. Obviously most effective the more people use it, but better than nothing.
Only if people use it properly which I also doubt. An alert comes in you have been in contact with someone who thinks they now have covid. Stuff that I am not self isolating I feel fine and I am meeting friends later will be the general attitude I think
On SK I remember linking to their public websites in February showing the journeys and times each infected person had made so that people could heck if they had been exposed or not. Come May we have absolutely nothing like this. If we are going to make trace and isolate work we need it. That means accepting that your smartphone is used to track you and that information is put into the public domain, no doubt anonymised but probably identifiable to those who know you.
Are we ready for that? I am but I am not sure.
What has this government done to make its opponents trust it?
This would be a tough sell anyway and having a government led by figures who revel in playing fast and loose with data is only going to make it harder.
I think that Brits feel that way about every government. We have a healthy distrust of authority. Remember the arguments about ID cards under Blair? The question is whether enough people can be persuaded to take part. It has to be voluntary.
The issues with such an app are these:-
1. What is done with the information collected? 2. Who has access to it and what can they use it for? Not just information-sharing within the public sector but whether it is sold to private companies for private gain. 3. What are the controls on its use and how can we trust them? 4. How long is the information is held for and is it deleted once no longer needed? 5. The security of the app ie ensuring that it does not make hacking of other personal information / systems easier.
Similar issues arise with the Coronavirus Regulations - very oppressive legislation, passed in days. We need to keep a very close eye on them to make sure that they are repealed at the earliest possible time. Power grabs by authorities have a tendency to stay far beyond their sell by date, if we are not careful.
The data is recorded under an anonymous ID, rather than by the person's name.
If and when someone starts showing symptoms, or tests positive for Covid-19, they are able to share that on the app.
The app then sends a notification warning of possible infection to all those phone users to have come in requisite proximity recently....
What kind of mug would trust Johnson, Gove et al, you would have to be mentally deranged.
Funnily enough Nicola is outlining the same test trace isolate policy just now on Sky and it will be a key part but will need to combine safe distancing and use of masks. Also people will need to self isolate if they have been near a covid infection
Also increased testing and the use of a digital system. Proximity app is being led by UK government and is an important part of any system
To be fair Nicola is doing a good job
Maybe a bit more constructive comments Malc would add to the debate.
Nicola's trace, test, isolate policy will be a tremendous piece of Scottish ingenuity and a great idea not like chancer Boris's evil trace, track, isolate policy that will be almost identical.
To be fair she did say the app is being developed by the UK government and she hopes to partake in the scheme
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
"Apple bravely stands up to evil Tory Government using the virus as an excuse to spy on its citizens for nefarious purposes".
Says the headline in the Liberatarian News. Circulation @Pagan2 - and his dog
It's a strange sort of spying that relies upon an app people voluntarily install and can disable or uninstall at will.
For all those horrified about giving up your information to the Gov't, @HYUFD approach is favoured overwhemingly in the polling.
Anyway it's either giving up your every movement to Crapita/G4S (The Gov't is bound to outsource the weeds of the system), lockdown or death.
There needs to be a high degree of consent for this programme to work. So you also make the effort to get people on board. There probably also needs to be a degree of compulsion to get the coverage. What form that compulsion takes has to be worked out, but the basic deal is that the system enables you conveniently to do activities that are prevented by lockdown.
And those that refuse will also go out doing those activities
There are a few ifs in this. But if the bulk of people accept contact apps enable more and safer activity and if the government applies the rules in an intelligent way, I think that group of refuseniks would be quite small.
percentage of over 65's in uk population is 18%, percentage of over 65's with a smartphone is 18% so there is already 14.76% of the population without an app.
Down a notch 55 to 65 45% dont have a smart phone I expect that to be another 8 to 9% of population added without an app almost at a quarter of people already
"80% of smartphone users" by definition won't include those who aren't smartphone users.
That's like discussing what percentage of children should be in school and saying "x% of the UK is over 18 and don't go to school".
Well in a few weeks if they ever release the tracking app we will see who is correct won't we. I still think under 50% take up
Even if it is around 40-50% that would still be a huge help for the tracking and tracing program. Obviously most effective the more people use it, but better than nothing.
Only if people use it properly which I also doubt. An alert comes in you have been in contact with someone who thinks they now have covid. Stuff that I am not self isolating I feel fine and I am meeting friends later will be the general attitude I think
Do you think they'd also go and see their frail grandma?
I think you have an incorrect view of the population at large. Compliance with the lockdown to date demonstrates that.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
If the UK gov app works using a 0-day exploit (a software bug that is not generally known about) of the IOS bluetooth stack, as has been reported, Apple absolutely will ban it from the App Store.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
"Apple bravely stands up to evil Tory Government using the virus as an excuse to spy on its citizens for nefarious purposes".
Says the headline in the Liberatarian News. Circulation @Pagan2 - and his dog
Why do people keep labelling this as a libertarian view point? I hardly ever agree with Mr Meeks and he takes the same view, Cyclefree also is of the same view and a couple of others. They aren't libertarians. Neither is it a stretch to think that tracking us won't become a more than temporary measure. Governments of all colours always push for more data on us.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
I am not sure how many other government are following our approach. Germany was, but ditched it, in favour of the Apple/Goole API.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
"Apple bravely stands up to evil Tory Government using the virus as an excuse to spy on its citizens for nefarious purposes".
Says the headline in the Liberatarian News. Circulation @Pagan2 - and his dog
It's a strange sort of spying that relies upon an app people voluntarily install and can disable or uninstall at will.
As I pointed out to you quite a few are saying it should be mandatory
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
I am not sure how many other government are following our approach. Germany was, but ditched it, in favour of the Apple/Goole API.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
"Apple bravely stands up to evil Tory Government using the virus as an excuse to spy on its citizens for nefarious purposes".
Says the headline in the Liberatarian News. Circulation @Pagan2 - and his dog
Why do people keep labelling this as a libertarian view point? I hardly ever agree with Mr Meeks and he takes the same view, Cyclefree also is of the same view and a couple of others. They aren't libertarians. Neither is it a stretch to think that tracking us won't become a more than temporary measure. Governments of all colours always push for more data on us.
I've no idea. People voluntarily sharing information via voluntarily downloading a temporary app they can disable or uninstall at will is perfectly libertarian. There is no libertarian reason not to engage with the app.
If the government wants to track us permanently they'll need to do more than get us to download an app I will uninstall whenever I want to and certainly by the end of this pandemic.
Anyway, if there's any attempt at compulsion in tracking my movements via my mobile phone, I'll simply leave it at home.
Which is why it has to be made compulsory. ie you don't legally leave your house without it. Track and trace is either effective in controlling infections or it's not. By effective, I mean avoiding both permanent lockdown and mass death. If it's not effective, ditch it and accept death or lockdown. If it is effective everyone needs to be using it.
I have no idea if the app is going to be useful but as far as compulsion is concerned there's a middle way something like: - End the lockdown a couple of days early for people with the app - Offer to send law enforcement to do spot-checks at private venues like shopping centres that make a policy of requiring the app.
In practice strong enforcement may not be very practical, but people won't really be sure in advance that it won't be, so what this does is to flip the least-bother default from "don't install" to "install", while still allowing people who are worried about it to opt out.
Too much compulsion is probably a bad idea, as if you get people really annoyed they can probably mess with it and spam it with bad data, but if you can get the apathetic as well as the tracking enthusiasts that's almost the entire population. It's a game of averages, you don't have to get *everyone*.
Thinking about this, I think entry points into buildings and buses are where you would control this. People would use the app for the convenience, like they are happy to show ID to get on an easyJet flight.
Also people need time to warm up to what the app is trying to achieve and to understand the alternatives. If they agree (a) this is the only way to avoid permanent lockdown or mass death and (b) the app works, they are likely to come round without heavy-handed compulsion.
So you get to Tesco's find your mobile battery is dead or you left it at home. Sorry sir you can't come in. As I pointed out only 55% of over 55's have a smart phone. When people are told they can't shop because of the three reasons above the grumbling will start and continue to grow
Regarding treatment protocol for Coronavirus, I am pretty sure that variations on a theme of chloroquin and zinc are the gold standard, despite widespread media hype in the other direction. I follow Dr Berg (keto diet and intermittent fasting) and he has a very methodical way of explaining the science - very much pitched at the layman. This is well worth a watch.
I can only think widespread attempts to discredit this treatment are a result of the early Trump endorsement.
Absent some very surprising randomised clinical trial results, I don't think there's any need to discredit it; there is simply no evidence that it works, and significant evidence of potentially severe side effects.
Scientists without an agenda would be very wary of trying to make massive claims about crucial public policy decisions without access to the full data. It is not how peer review science works.
Remember the Sunday Times "scoop", that claimed an academic was against government policy. His reply was, I wasn't there in that particular meeting and (most importantly), as I wasn't present, I didn't see the data / evidence presented and therefore I am unable to pass informed judgement, so I must defer to the decision made by those who did.
Tories just cannot help being nasty........................
ONE OF Boris Johnson's closest allies has resigned from the government after he was found guilty of trying to use parliamentary privilege to “intimidate a member of the public” in a row over debt. Conor Burns, Minister of State for International Trade, faces a seven day ban from the Commons following his intervention in a dispute over a loan reypayment beteween with a company and his father.
Because no one in any other party has ever done anything like that eh Malc?]
Tories would be world champions every year , trust you to try and excuse their constant abuses of power by justifying it by saying a few others have done some bad things. Bit like Tories murder hundreds but it is OK as that guy up the road murdered someone 10 years ago.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
I am not sure how many other government are following our approach. Germany was, but ditched it, in favour of the Apple/Goole API.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
Looks like we'll all be getting the Apple and Google one anyway:
Google and Apple plan to address the take-up and persistent surveillance problems by first distributing the system through operating system updates, and later removing it in the same way once the threat has passed.[32]
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
I am not sure how many other government are following our approach. Germany was, but ditched it, in favour of the Apple/Goole API.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
Looks like we'll all be getting the Apple and Google one anyway:
Google and Apple plan to address the take-up and persistent surveillance problems by first distributing the system through operating system updates, and later removing it in the same way once the threat has passed.[32]
Are you also forced to listen to a terrible U2 album at the same time?
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
"Apple bravely stands up to evil Tory Government using the virus as an excuse to spy on its citizens for nefarious purposes".
Says the headline in the Liberatarian News. Circulation @Pagan2 - and his dog
Possibly, but you might be underestimating the verve with which Apple fanboys tend to defend the company, even when it's obviously in the wrong.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
"Apple bravely stands up to evil Tory Government using the virus as an excuse to spy on its citizens for nefarious purposes".
Says the headline in the Liberatarian News. Circulation @Pagan2 - and his dog
It's a strange sort of spying that relies upon an app people voluntarily install and can disable or uninstall at will.
As I pointed out to you quite a few are saying it should be mandatory
By quite a few do you mean HYUFD?
And as I have said that is moronic. For one thing even if you install the app you can then uninstall it and/or disable Bluetooth. Or turn your phone off. Or turn your phone on airplane mode. Or whatever.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
I am not sure how many other government are following our approach. Germany was, but ditched it, in favour of the Apple/Goole API.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
Looks like we'll all be getting the Apple and Google one anyway:
Google and Apple plan to address the take-up and persistent surveillance problems by first distributing the system through operating system updates, and later removing it in the same way once the threat has passed.[32]
All they are doing themselves is a framework API (software interface) - it will still be up to individual governments to write the front-end apps themselves.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
I am not sure how many other government are following our approach. Germany was, but ditched it, in favour of the Apple/Goole API.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
Looks like we'll all be getting the Apple and Google one anyway:
Google and Apple plan to address the take-up and persistent surveillance problems by first distributing the system through operating system updates, and later removing it in the same way once the threat has passed.[32]
All they are doing themselves is a framework API (software interface) - it will still be up to individual governments to write the front-end apps themselves.
Ah, okay. I suppose it makes a pivot a little easier if our hacker version does get banned.
Clinical classifiers of COVID-19 infection from novel ultra-high-throughput proteomics https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.27.20081810v1.full.pdf The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented global challenge. Highly variable in its presentation, spread and clinical outcome, novel point-of-care diagnostic classifiers are urgently required. Here, we describe a set of COVID-19 clinical classifiers discovered using a newly designed low-cost high-throughput mass spectrometry-based platform. Introducing a new sample preparation pipeline coupled with short-gradient high-flow liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry, our methodology facilitates clinical implementation and increases sample throughput and quantification precision. Providing a rapid assessment of serum or plasma samples at scale, we report 27 biomarkers that distinguish mild and severe forms of COVID-19, of which some may have potential as therapeutic targets. These proteins highlight the role of complement factors, the coagulation system, inflammation modulators as well as pro-inflammatory signalling upstream and downstream of Interleukin 6. Application of novel methodologies hence transforms proteomics from a research tool into a rapid-response, clinically actionable technology adaptable to infectious outbreaks....
assuming your clients have got standard freelance contracts the tax man will only know about it when you tell them. as we are in 20/21 you won't need to declare it for quite some time. IIRC December 2021. You are not doing anything wrong so don't worry. Good luck.
On SK I remember linking to their public websites in February showing the journeys and times each infected person had made so that people could heck if they had been exposed or not. Come May we have absolutely nothing like this. If we are going to make trace and isolate work we need it. That means accepting that your smartphone is used to track you and that information is put into the public domain, no doubt anonymised but probably identifiable to those who know you.
Are we ready for that? I am but I am not sure.
What has this government done to make its opponents trust it?
This would be a tough sell anyway and having a government led by figures who revel in playing fast and loose with data is only going to make it harder.
I think that Brits feel that way about every government. We have a healthy distrust of authority. Remember the arguments about ID cards under Blair? The question is whether enough people can be persuaded to take part. It has to be voluntary.
The issues with such an app are these:-
1. What is done with the information collected? 2. Who has access to it and what can they use it for? Not just information-sharing within the public sector but whether it is sold to private companies for private gain. 3. What are the controls on its use and how can we trust them? 4. How long is the information is held for and is it deleted once no longer needed? 5. The security of the app ie ensuring that it does not make hacking of other personal information / systems easier.
Similar issues arise with the Coronavirus Regulations - very oppressive legislation, passed in days. We need to keep a very close eye on them to make sure that they are repealed at the earliest possible time. Power grabs by authorities have a tendency to stay far beyond their sell by date, if we are not careful.
The data is recorded under an anonymous ID, rather than by the person's name.
If and when someone starts showing symptoms, or tests positive for Covid-19, they are able to share that on the app.
The app then sends a notification warning of possible infection to all those phone users to have come in requisite proximity recently....
What kind of mug would trust Johnson, Gove et al, you would have to be mentally deranged.
Funnily enough Nicola is outlining the same test trace isolate policy just now on Sky and it will be a key part but will need to combine safe distancing and use of masks. Also people will need to self isolate if they have been near a covid infection
Also increased testing and the use of a digital system. Proximity app is being led by UK government and is an important part of any system
To be fair Nicola is doing a good job
Maybe a bit more constructive comments Malc would add to the debate.
G, I go by what I see and the current government leaders are a bunch of lying , cheating , shysters. I would not trust a word that comes out of their mouths. Total belief in a cult is not for me I am afraid, I use my brain and look at the facts. I am exactly the same with the only Scottish political party as well, I do not slavishly believe all they say, though they are amateurs in respect to the lying cheating Tory mob.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
I am not sure how many other government are following our approach. Germany was, but ditched it, in favour of the Apple/Goole API.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
Looks like we'll all be getting the Apple and Google one anyway:
Google and Apple plan to address the take-up and persistent surveillance problems by first distributing the system through operating system updates, and later removing it in the same way once the threat has passed.[32]
All they are doing themselves is a framework API (software interface) - it will still be up to individual governments to write the front-end apps themselves.
Best solution would just be to integrate it into the OS itself
The Cheltenham thing is a complete red herring created by people who don't like others enjoying themselves. Around 60000 there each day (I was one of them) primarily in the open air.
Compare that with the daily number using the underground.
No, the Cheltenham thing is a complete red herring created by CCHQ to distract attention from Boris watching the rugby at Twickers three days earlier.
For all those horrified about giving up your information to the Gov't, @HYUFD approach is favoured overwhemingly in the polling.
Anyway it's either giving up your every movement to Crapita/G4S (The Gov't is bound to outsource the weeds of the system), lockdown or death.
There needs to be a high degree of consent for this programme to work. So you also make the effort to get people on board. There probably also needs to be a degree of compulsion to get the coverage. What form that compulsion takes has to be worked out, but the basic deal is that the system enables you conveniently to do activities that are prevented by lockdown.
And those that refuse will also go out doing those activities
There are a few ifs in this. But if the bulk of people accept contact apps enable more and safer activity and if the government applies the rules in an intelligent way, I think that group of refuseniks would be quite small.
percentage of over 65's in uk population is 18%, percentage of over 65's with a smartphone is 18% so there is already 14.76% of the population without an app.
Down a notch 55 to 65 45% dont have a smart phone I expect that to be another 8 to 9% of population added without an app almost at a quarter of people already
"80% of smartphone users" by definition won't include those who aren't smartphone users.
That's like discussing what percentage of children should be in school and saying "x% of the UK is over 18 and don't go to school".
Well in a few weeks if they ever release the tracking app we will see who is correct won't we. I still think under 50% take up
Even if it is around 40-50% that would still be a huge help for the tracking and tracing program. Obviously most effective the more people use it, but better than nothing.
Only if people use it properly which I also doubt. An alert comes in you have been in contact with someone who thinks they now have covid. Stuff that I am not self isolating I feel fine and I am meeting friends later will be the general attitude I think
Fair enough but please don't moan when we are back in lockdown again in a couple of months time because that's exactly where we are headed in this country because too many people will not act responsibly.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
I am not sure how many other government are following our approach. Germany was, but ditched it, in favour of the Apple/Goole API.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
Looks like we'll all be getting the Apple and Google one anyway:
Google and Apple plan to address the take-up and persistent surveillance problems by first distributing the system through operating system updates, and later removing it in the same way once the threat has passed.[32]
All they are doing themselves is a framework API (software interface) - it will still be up to individual governments to write the front-end apps themselves.
Makes me wonder if the various national apps will interface at all? Eg if a traveller comes into contact in an airport will that be identified? Or would you need to be on same apps.
Regarding treatment protocol for Coronavirus, I am pretty sure that variations on a theme of chloroquin and zinc are the gold standard, despite widespread media hype in the other direction. I follow Dr Berg (keto diet and intermittent fasting) and he has a very methodical way of explaining the science - very much pitched at the layman. This is well worth a watch.
I can only think widespread attempts to discredit this treatment are a result of the early Trump endorsement.
Absent some very surprising randomised clinical trial results, I don't think there's any need to discredit it; there is simply no evidence that it works, and significant evidence of potentially severe side effects.
I've been drinking plenty of G&T just in case quinine helps. But doctors aren't stupid. If there was any evidence this worked, they'd all be using it.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
I am not sure how many other government are following our approach. Germany was, but ditched it, in favour of the Apple/Goole API.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
Looks like we'll all be getting the Apple and Google one anyway:
Google and Apple plan to address the take-up and persistent surveillance problems by first distributing the system through operating system updates, and later removing it in the same way once the threat has passed.[32]
All they are doing themselves is a framework API (software interface) - it will still be up to individual governments to write the front-end apps themselves.
Best solution would just be to integrate it into the OS itself
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
I am not sure how many other government are following our approach. Germany was, but ditched it, in favour of the Apple/Goole API.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
Looks like we'll all be getting the Apple and Google one anyway:
Google and Apple plan to address the take-up and persistent surveillance problems by first distributing the system through operating system updates, and later removing it in the same way once the threat has passed.[32]
All they are doing themselves is a framework API (software interface) - it will still be up to individual governments to write the front-end apps themselves.
Makes me wonder if the various national apps will interface at all? Eg if a traveller comes into contact in an airport will that be identified? Or would you need to be on same apps.
I expect other countries will make having THEIR app a requirement of entry whereas we'll probably just say well it's not going to affect the overall prevalence and let travellers carry on their merry way.
They all seem to have something in common, I just can't quite put my finger on what it is...be interesting to see if Starmer decides to use their criticisms of the government or not.
From the Telegraph live blog
"I think the main point I’m making is that an independent science advisory group really needs to be dominated by people whose income is not determined by the fact they are working for the Government."
I'd be surprised if the people on SAGE were salaried employees of the government. They seem to be under the impression SAGE are just a bunch of yes-men.
Does anyone think otherwise apart from Tory fanboys.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
"Apple bravely stands up to evil Tory Government using the virus as an excuse to spy on its citizens for nefarious purposes".
Says the headline in the Liberatarian News. Circulation @Pagan2 - and his dog
Why do people keep labelling this as a libertarian view point? I hardly ever agree with Mr Meeks and he takes the same view, Cyclefree also is of the same view and a couple of others. They aren't libertarians. Neither is it a stretch to think that tracking us won't become a more than temporary measure. Governments of all colours always push for more data on us.
I've no idea. People voluntarily sharing information via voluntarily downloading a temporary app they can disable or uninstall at will is perfectly libertarian. There is no libertarian reason not to engage with the app.
If the government wants to track us permanently they'll need to do more than get us to download an app I will uninstall whenever I want to and certainly by the end of this pandemic.
It is also surely possible to be a libertarian and not believe in a right to privacy.
On Brexit, I see Govey saying "I'll recruit pen pushers to tie business up in knots of red tape" and see self-styled true conservatives like HYUFD insisting thats a Good Thing. Business is not going to allow any such thing to happen, even the Tories won't be able to withstand Tesco and Jaguar saying "thats us fucked then" as the economy judders along in the midst of the worst recession we have seen in decades.
People voted for Brexit, they didn't vote for the consequences of Brexit. They haven't a clue how the economy works, how trade works, how manufacturing works, how the supply chain works. They are clueless - they just think that The Man has screwed them too many times and they want to Take Back Control for a change.
Local Brexiteers up here want an end to being told what to do by the EU. They don't want to see an end to local shops and for Tesco shelves to be half empty which is exactly what will happen if we leave with No Deal as anyone who knows anything about how it works (not HYUFD then) will tell you with precise detail. So its an empty threat. "But you voted for this" is what Goebbels said in the penultimate scene in Downfall before he shot himself...
Its a fudge. The "surrender" referred to earlier was that the UK surrendered its sovereignty over NI and agreed to place an intra-British border down the Irish Sea. Thats not a win for anyone including the EU so of course noone is celebrating it. That the government say "oh no we haven't" when presented with the treaty which says "oh yes you have" next to Shagger's signature tells you all you need to know.
They know the voters haven't a clue. They know the voters don't care about the details of what Brexit is. So exactly as they did having thrown NI under the buss they will simply declare victory and everyone will Move On. We won't have Free Movement as neither will a post-viral EU. We will have additional checks as they will also have between France and Germany and that sour-faced Patel troll will say its a triumph of Her Policy.
Your post fails in its first paragraph. Tesco and Jaguar won't say "thats us fucked then" as they won't be fucked. In fact Tesco and Jaguar are more than capable of dealing with paperwork which they already deal with for non-EU trade. Its no big deal for them.
The third paragraph is equally absurd. The shelves won't be empty.
The fourth paragraph is nonsense too. NI wasn't surrendered, the protocol requires ongoing Stormont consent to stay in place. Devolution is well established in this nation now.
The second and fifth paragraphs are just ranting and insulting the intelligence of people, it has no actual point.
But apart from that . . .
As I said, you evidently know more about supply chain logistics than supply chains and logistics do. Go ask the Port of Dover what impact all of these checks will have. Don't say "use another port" as it'll be the same there as well" The queues will back up forever, trucks won't get through and that means stuff won't get through. Which means food and car parts.
So yes, they will be fucked. As their industries have detailed.
They all seem to have something in common, I just can't quite put my finger on what it is...be interesting to see if Starmer decides to use their criticisms of the government or not.
From the Telegraph live blog
"I think the main point I’m making is that an independent science advisory group really needs to be dominated by people whose income is not determined by the fact they are working for the Government."
I'd be surprised if the people on SAGE were salaried employees of the government. They seem to be under the impression SAGE are just a bunch of yes-men.
Does anyone think otherwise apart from Tory fanboys.
Regarding the book row, I am uncomfortable with the idea that if you have a book on a bookshelf it means you must endorse the contents. Some people no doubt have carefully curated bookshelves but for other people they just use their bookshelves as a dumping ground and never throw anything out.
Do we even know Gove even read the book? Could easily be an unwanted birthday or Christmas present. Could belong to someone else in the family.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
I am not sure how many other government are following our approach. Germany was, but ditched it, in favour of the Apple/Goole API.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
Looks like we'll all be getting the Apple and Google one anyway:
Google and Apple plan to address the take-up and persistent surveillance problems by first distributing the system through operating system updates, and later removing it in the same way once the threat has passed.[32]
All they are doing themselves is a framework API (software interface) - it will still be up to individual governments to write the front-end apps themselves.
Best solution would just be to integrate it into the OS itself
The problem is that it would still require inputs from government or medical professionals, such as positive and negative test results, number of days to go back or forwards for 'contacts' etc. These will vary by jurisdiction, as will the precise language and instructions used for alerts.
Another good reason for all moderate, non-headbanging Brexit-delusionaries to lend their support to SKS
Wouldn't it be better if he said it was or wasn't ending though ? I mean for clarity.
Sounds like Starmer is keeping the Single Market option open. His strategy seems to be 'Let's not mention Brexit". Either it will blow over or it will go pear shaped, at which point people will be looking for alternatives.
Yes, the next general election looks like continued hard Brexit and WTO terms with Boris or rejoin the single market with Starmer and the LDs and SNP
Which will be one of the reasons, "Boris" as you so lovingly refer to him as, will lose. The main reason will be that Starmer is not Corbyn or "Boris". And Bozo will be grateful, because he will have got the badge that he so longed to have, but he will no longer have to find ways to dodge the hard work
Meanwhile in the real world Boris has already won. If Labour wins after 14 years of Tory governments then so be it.
Sense "Boris" has become like Liverpool FC for you. In which case, fine, but you're on the hook for life. That's what true fandom is. 20 years from now, Liverpool might be wallowing in mid-table mediocrity and "Boris" might be doing a five stretch for something slippery and beyond the pale, but you - you will still have to keep churning out the love. This is the deal so I hope you are going in with eyes open.
You're right. I'm not a glory hunter, I support what I want to through thick and thin. What's wrong with that?
On sports I supported my clubs through thick and thin. I grew up used to disappointments, despite being born early 80s so can barely remember some Liverpool success my memories are more from the 90s.
I grew up in Australia in the 90s a "Pome Bastard" supporting English cricket during The Ashes. I remained an England fan through thick and thin surrounded by Australians in the 1990s. If that didn't break me what makes you think mid table mediocrity will do?
Same in politics. I am an unabashed liberal Conservative, aka a libertarian. I believe in economically dry, socially liberal Conservatives like Thatcher, Cameron and Johnson. I oppose social conservativism or left wing economics and my views don't change to match what the leadership of any particular party says. When May led the party I was vocal in opposition to "my" party because her vicious "Go Home" politics do not represent me.
Here is what you need to ponder. "Boris" is popular with a great many people who are decidedly not "socially liberal". It leaves 3 possibilities.
(i) He IS a social liberal and is fooling his Get Brexit Done base. (ii) He is NOT a social liberal and is fooling you (and those like you). (iii) He is devoid of core belief and is fooling EVERYONE who supports him.
You will be interested to hear that the most likely answer is a (i) with a generous helping of (iii).
What makes you think "Get Brexit Done" is socially illiberal?
What fills me with confidence is decades of listening to him speak. He has consistently been liberal - including during the referendum campaign. He isn't some Farage/IDS/HYUFD social conservative headbanger.
Some Brexit supporters are socially liberal but a large number are not. Those for whom Farage had great appeal, for example. Few social liberals there.
It's a 2+2 = 4 point again, Philip, I'm afraid. Best to just accept it.
You are right Farage is not socially liberal. I despise Farage.
But there is a reason Boris worked with Gove etc in Vote Leave and not Farage etc in Leave.EU - why do you think that is?
Because he is a social liberal fooling his Hard Brexit base. Or possibly devoid of core belief and thus fooling all who support him.
As per my original post. Which is looking impeccable.
Again Hard Brexit is not a social liberal v conservative issue.
Not exclusively. Of course not. Hard Brexiteers are not all Farage types. But lots of them are. And "Boris" managed to appeal to this section of the electorate. Hence Farage killed off and an 80 seat majority. Well done "Boris". To make them think he shares their values and world view when he doesn't took great political skill.
There - if we put it positively like that, so we don't say your hero "fooled" them, we say that it just shows what a "winner" he is, does this make you a teeny bit happier?
Winning depends upon building a big tent yes but he never fooled anyone and never pretended to be (or campaigned with) Farage.
"Boris" Johnson never fooled anyone. Priti Patel is a "social liberal".
These are fabulous. But don't go thinking you can never top them. That way lies decline.
Another good reason for all moderate, non-headbanging Brexit-delusionaries to lend their support to SKS
Wouldn't it be better if he said it was or wasn't ending though ? I mean for clarity.
Sounds like Starmer is keeping the Single Market option open. His strategy seems to be 'Let's not mention Brexit". Either it will blow over or it will go pear shaped, at which point people will be looking for alternatives.
Yes, the next general election looks like continued hard Brexit and WTO terms with Boris or rejoin the single market with Starmer and the LDs and SNP
Very unlikely. Most people will have moved on and won't be interested.Not much different to the Iraq War , Suez or Rhodesia.
To mask or not to mask: Modeling the potential for face mask use by the general public to curtail the COVID-19 pandemic https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468042720300117?via=ihub Face mask use by the general public for limiting the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic is controversial, though increasingly recommended, and the potential of this intervention is not well understood. We develop a compartmental model for assessing the community-wide impact of mask use by the general, asymptomatic public, a portion of which may be asymptomatically infectious. Model simulations, using data relevant to COVID-19 dynamics in the US states of New York and Washington, suggest that broad adoption of even relatively ineffective face masks may meaningfully reduce community transmission of COVID-19 and decrease peak hospitalizations and deaths. Moreover, mask use decreases the effective transmission rate in nearly linear proportion to the product of mask effectiveness (as a fraction of potentially infectious contacts blocked) and coverage rate (as a fraction of the general population), while the impact on epidemiologic outcomes (death, hospitalizations) is highly nonlinear, indicating masks could synergize with other non-pharmaceutical measures. Notably, masks are found to be useful with respect to both preventing illness in healthy persons and preventing asymptomatic transmission. Hypothetical mask adoption scenarios, for Washington and New York state, suggest that immediate near universal (80%) adoption of moderately (50%) effective masks could prevent on the order of 17–45% of projected deaths over two months in New York, while decreasing the peak daily death rate by 34–58%, absent other changes in epidemic dynamics. Even very weak masks (20% effective) can still be useful if the underlying transmission rate is relatively low or decreasing: In Washington, where baseline transmission is much less intense, 80% adoption of such masks could reduce mortality by 24–65% (and peak deaths 15–69%), compared to 2–9% mortality reduction in New York (peak death reduction 9–18%). Our results suggest use of face masks by the general public is potentially of high value in curtailing community transmission and the burden of the pandemic. The community-wide benefits are likely to be greatest when face masks are used in conjunction with other non-pharmaceutical practices (such as social-distancing), and when adoption is nearly universal (nation-wide) and compliance is high....
To mask or not to mask: Modeling the potential for face mask use by the general public to curtail the COVID-19 pandemic https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468042720300117?via=ihub Face mask use by the general public for limiting the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic is controversial, though increasingly recommended, and the potential of this intervention is not well understood. We develop a compartmental model for assessing the community-wide impact of mask use by the general, asymptomatic public, a portion of which may be asymptomatically infectious. Model simulations, using data relevant to COVID-19 dynamics in the US states of New York and Washington, suggest that broad adoption of even relatively ineffective face masks may meaningfully reduce community transmission of COVID-19 and decrease peak hospitalizations and deaths. Moreover, mask use decreases the effective transmission rate in nearly linear proportion to the product of mask effectiveness (as a fraction of potentially infectious contacts blocked) and coverage rate (as a fraction of the general population), while the impact on epidemiologic outcomes (death, hospitalizations) is highly nonlinear, indicating masks could synergize with other non-pharmaceutical measures. Notably, masks are found to be useful with respect to both preventing illness in healthy persons and preventing asymptomatic transmission. Hypothetical mask adoption scenarios, for Washington and New York state, suggest that immediate near universal (80%) adoption of moderately (50%) effective masks could prevent on the order of 17–45% of projected deaths over two months in New York, while decreasing the peak daily death rate by 34–58%, absent other changes in epidemic dynamics. Even very weak masks (20% effective) can still be useful if the underlying transmission rate is relatively low or decreasing: In Washington, where baseline transmission is much less intense, 80% adoption of such masks could reduce mortality by 24–65% (and peak deaths 15–69%), compared to 2–9% mortality reduction in New York (peak death reduction 9–18%). Our results suggest use of face masks by the general public is potentially of high value in curtailing community transmission and the burden of the pandemic. The community-wide benefits are likely to be greatest when face masks are used in conjunction with other non-pharmaceutical practices (such as social-distancing), and when adoption is nearly universal (nation-wide) and compliance is high....
The last bit is sort of stating the obvious. Staying apart from people is probably the most effective way of stopping transmission. If you are doing that, a mask isn't going to do much more.
To mask or not to mask: Modeling the potential for face mask use by the general public to curtail the COVID-19 pandemic https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468042720300117?via=ihub Face mask use by the general public for limiting the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic is controversial, though increasingly recommended, and the potential of this intervention is not well understood. We develop a compartmental model for assessing the community-wide impact of mask use by the general, asymptomatic public, a portion of which may be asymptomatically infectious. Model simulations, using data relevant to COVID-19 dynamics in the US states of New York and Washington, suggest that broad adoption of even relatively ineffective face masks may meaningfully reduce community transmission of COVID-19 and decrease peak hospitalizations and deaths. Moreover, mask use decreases the effective transmission rate in nearly linear proportion to the product of mask effectiveness (as a fraction of potentially infectious contacts blocked) and coverage rate (as a fraction of the general population), while the impact on epidemiologic outcomes (death, hospitalizations) is highly nonlinear, indicating masks could synergize with other non-pharmaceutical measures. Notably, masks are found to be useful with respect to both preventing illness in healthy persons and preventing asymptomatic transmission. Hypothetical mask adoption scenarios, for Washington and New York state, suggest that immediate near universal (80%) adoption of moderately (50%) effective masks could prevent on the order of 17–45% of projected deaths over two months in New York, while decreasing the peak daily death rate by 34–58%, absent other changes in epidemic dynamics. Even very weak masks (20% effective) can still be useful if the underlying transmission rate is relatively low or decreasing: In Washington, where baseline transmission is much less intense, 80% adoption of such masks could reduce mortality by 24–65% (and peak deaths 15–69%), compared to 2–9% mortality reduction in New York (peak death reduction 9–18%). Our results suggest use of face masks by the general public is potentially of high value in curtailing community transmission and the burden of the pandemic. The community-wide benefits are likely to be greatest when face masks are used in conjunction with other non-pharmaceutical practices (such as social-distancing), and when adoption is nearly universal (nation-wide) and compliance is high....
The last bit is sort of stating the obvious. Staying apart from people is probably the most effective way of stopping transmission. If you are doing that, a mask isn't going to do much more.
It may be useful for situations where it is difficult to stay far enough apart though, eg public transport and shops
To mask or not to mask: Modeling the potential for face mask use by the general public to curtail the COVID-19 pandemic https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468042720300117?via=ihub Face mask use by the general public for limiting the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic is controversial, though increasingly recommended, and the potential of this intervention is not well understood. We develop a compartmental model for assessing the community-wide impact of mask use by the general, asymptomatic public, a portion of which may be asymptomatically infectious. Model simulations, using data relevant to COVID-19 dynamics in the US states of New York and Washington, suggest that broad adoption of even relatively ineffective face masks may meaningfully reduce community transmission of COVID-19 and decrease peak hospitalizations and deaths. Moreover, mask use decreases the effective transmission rate in nearly linear proportion to the product of mask effectiveness (as a fraction of potentially infectious contacts blocked) and coverage rate (as a fraction of the general population), while the impact on epidemiologic outcomes (death, hospitalizations) is highly nonlinear, indicating masks could synergize with other non-pharmaceutical measures. Notably, masks are found to be useful with respect to both preventing illness in healthy persons and preventing asymptomatic transmission. Hypothetical mask adoption scenarios, for Washington and New York state, suggest that immediate near universal (80%) adoption of moderately (50%) effective masks could prevent on the order of 17–45% of projected deaths over two months in New York, while decreasing the peak daily death rate by 34–58%, absent other changes in epidemic dynamics. Even very weak masks (20% effective) can still be useful if the underlying transmission rate is relatively low or decreasing: In Washington, where baseline transmission is much less intense, 80% adoption of such masks could reduce mortality by 24–65% (and peak deaths 15–69%), compared to 2–9% mortality reduction in New York (peak death reduction 9–18%). Our results suggest use of face masks by the general public is potentially of high value in curtailing community transmission and the burden of the pandemic. The community-wide benefits are likely to be greatest when face masks are used in conjunction with other non-pharmaceutical practices (such as social-distancing), and when adoption is nearly universal (nation-wide) and compliance is high....
The last bit is sort of stating the obvious. Staying apart from people is probably the most effective way of stopping transmission. If you are doing that, a mask isn't going to do much more.
Good luck with that at any supermarket near where I live
Probably, as he behaved both poorly in a serious way and dishonestly in reaction saving any genuine apology until the very end (ergo it was not in any way genuine but extracted grudgingly) though I hope we don’t one day go extreme and expect resignation over any breach.
On Brexit, I see Govey saying "I'll recruit pen pushers to tie business up in knots of red tape" and see self-styled true conservatives like HYUFD insisting thats a Good Thing. Business is not going to allow any such thing to happen, even the Tories won't be able to withstand Tesco and Jaguar saying "thats us fucked then" as the economy judders along in the midst of the worst recession we have seen in decades.
People voted for Brexit, they didn't vote for the consequences of Brexit. They haven't a clue how the economy works, how trade works, how manufacturing works, how the supply chain works. They are clueless - they just think that The Man has screwed them too many times and they want to Take Back Control for a change.
Local Brexiteers up here want an end to being told what to do by the EU. They don't want to see an end to local shops and for Tesco shelves to be half empty which is exactly what will happen if we leave with No Deal as anyone who knows anything about how it works (not HYUFD then) will tell you with precise detail. So its an empty threat. "But you voted for this" is what Goebbels said in the penultimate scene in Downfall before he shot himself...
Its a fudge. The "surrender" referred to earlier was that the UK surrendered its sovereignty over NI and agreed to place an intra-British border down the Irish Sea. Thats not a win for anyone including the EU so of course noone is celebrating it. That the government say "oh no we haven't" when presented with the treaty which says "oh yes you have" next to Shagger's signature tells you all you need to know.
They know the voters haven't a clue. They know the voters don't care about the details of what Brexit is. So exactly as they did having thrown NI under the buss they will simply declare victory and everyone will Move On. We won't have Free Movement as neither will a post-viral EU. We will have additional checks as they will also have between France and Germany and that sour-faced Patel troll will say its a triumph of Her Policy.
Your post fails in its first paragraph. Tesco and Jaguar won't say "thats us fucked then" as they won't be fucked. In fact Tesco and Jaguar are more than capable of dealing with paperwork which they already deal with for non-EU trade. Its no big deal for them.
The third paragraph is equally absurd. The shelves won't be empty.
The fourth paragraph is nonsense too. NI wasn't surrendered, the protocol requires ongoing Stormont consent to stay in place. Devolution is well established in this nation now.
The second and fifth paragraphs are just ranting and insulting the intelligence of people, it has no actual point.
But apart from that . . .
As I said, you evidently know more about supply chain logistics than supply chains and logistics do. Go ask the Port of Dover what impact all of these checks will have. Don't say "use another port" as it'll be the same there as well" The queues will back up forever, trucks won't get through and that means stuff won't get through. Which means food and car parts.
So yes, they will be fucked. As their industries have detailed.
The Port of Dover have said they can cope. That Port of Dover?
If queues are what you are worried about then coronavirus minimises that risk does it not?
They all seem to have something in common, I just can't quite put my finger on what it is...be interesting to see if Starmer decides to use their criticisms of the government or not.
From the Telegraph live blog
"I think the main point I’m making is that an independent science advisory group really needs to be dominated by people whose income is not determined by the fact they are working for the Government."
I'd be surprised if the people on SAGE were salaried employees of the government. They seem to be under the impression SAGE are just a bunch of yes-men.
Does anyone think otherwise apart from Tory fanboys.
Sometimes I worry about just how cynical you are.
It is based on what I see in reality Rob, unfortunately. I don't wear rosy specs.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
But it's stupid because Apple (and Google) have offered to help the government utilise some OS developer only features. We've actively declined that help in favour of an untested solution that utilises a security hole in iOS.
I am not sure how many other government are following our approach. Germany was, but ditched it, in favour of the Apple/Goole API.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
Looks like we'll all be getting the Apple and Google one anyway:
Google and Apple plan to address the take-up and persistent surveillance problems by first distributing the system through operating system updates, and later removing it in the same way once the threat has passed.[32]
All they are doing themselves is a framework API (software interface) - it will still be up to individual governments to write the front-end apps themselves.
Makes me wonder if the various national apps will interface at all? Eg if a traveller comes into contact in an airport will that be identified? Or would you need to be on same apps.
Theoretically the Apple/Google solution would work across different apps, the issues would arise when the local apps themselves are not designed to be compatible.
Also all the usual international App Store issues - so if I'm in a foreign country who won't put their own app on the UK App Store for GDPR reasons but make it compulsory to download as a condition of entry or access to services, or the NHS app that can't be downloaded by foreign visitors for similar reasons - remembering that tens of millions of people (at least) reside somewhere other than the location of their phone's App Store.
Another good reason for all moderate, non-headbanging Brexit-delusionaries to lend their support to SKS
Wouldn't it be better if he said it was or wasn't ending though ? I mean for clarity.
Sounds like Starmer is keeping the Single Market option open. His strategy seems to be 'Let's not mention Brexit". Either it will blow over or it will go pear shaped, at which point people will be looking for alternatives.
Yes, the next general election looks like continued hard Brexit and WTO terms with Boris or rejoin the single market with Starmer and the LDs and SNP
Which will be one of the reasons, "Boris" as you so lovingly refer to him as, will lose. The main reason will be that Starmer is not Corbyn or "Boris". And Bozo will be grateful, because he will have got the badge that he so longed to have, but he will no longer have to find ways to dodge the hard work
Meanwhile in the real world Boris has already won. If Labour wins after 14 years of Tory governments then so be it.
Sense "Boris" has become like Liverpool FC for you. In which case, fine, but you're on the hook for life. That's what true fandom is. 20 years from now, Liverpool might be wallowing in mid-table mediocrity and "Boris" might be doing a five stretch for something slippery and beyond the pale, but you - you will still have to keep churning out the love. This is the deal so I hope you are going in with eyes open.
You're right. I'm not a glory hunter, I support what I want to through thick and thin. What's wrong with that?
On sports I supported my clubs through thick and thin. I grew up used to disappointments, despite being born early 80s so can barely remember some Liverpool success my memories are more from the 90s.
I grew up in Australia in the 90s a "Pome Bastard" supporting English cricket during The Ashes. I remained an England fan through thick and thin surrounded by Australians in the 1990s. If that didn't break me what makes you think mid table mediocrity will do?
Same in politics. I am an unabashed liberal Conservative, aka a libertarian. I believe in economically dry, socially liberal Conservatives like Thatcher, Cameron and Johnson. I oppose social conservativism or left wing economics and my views don't change to match what the leadership of any particular party says. When May led the party I was vocal in opposition to "my" party because her vicious "Go Home" politics do not represent me.
Here is what you need to ponder. "Boris" is popular with a great many people who are decidedly not "socially liberal". It leaves 3 possibilities.
(i) He IS a social liberal and is fooling his Get Brexit Done base. (ii) He is NOT a social liberal and is fooling you (and those like you). (iii) He is devoid of core belief and is fooling EVERYONE who supports him.
You will be interested to hear that the most likely answer is a (i) with a generous helping of (iii).
What makes you think "Get Brexit Done" is socially illiberal?
What fills me with confidence is decades of listening to him speak. He has consistently been liberal - including during the referendum campaign. He isn't some Farage/IDS/HYUFD social conservative headbanger.
Some Brexit supporters are socially liberal but a large number are not. Those for whom Farage had great appeal, for example. Few social liberals there.
It's a 2+2 = 4 point again, Philip, I'm afraid. Best to just accept it.
You are right Farage is not socially liberal. I despise Farage.
But there is a reason Boris worked with Gove etc in Vote Leave and not Farage etc in Leave.EU - why do you think that is?
Because he is a social liberal fooling his Hard Brexit base. Or possibly devoid of core belief and thus fooling all who support him.
As per my original post. Which is looking impeccable.
Again Hard Brexit is not a social liberal v conservative issue.
Not exclusively. Of course not. Hard Brexiteers are not all Farage types. But lots of them are. And "Boris" managed to appeal to this section of the electorate. Hence Farage killed off and an 80 seat majority. Well done "Boris". To make them think he shares their values and world view when he doesn't took great political skill.
There - if we put it positively like that, so we don't say your hero "fooled" them, we say that it just shows what a "winner" he is, does this make you a teeny bit happier?
Winning depends upon building a big tent yes but he never fooled anyone and never pretended to be (or campaigned with) Farage.
"Boris" Johnson never fooled anyone. Priti Patel is a "social liberal".
These are fabulous. But don't go thinking you can never top them. That way lies decline.
I never said Patel is a social liberal I said she is more liberal than people give her credit for.
These are the types of people that sadly now hold positions of influence in the modern Conservative Party thanks to Bozo and his cabal. If this is true it is an absolute disgrace.
He’s behaved very poorly and that reflects on those that appointed him but you seem to be suggesting no mp in a position of influence had ever behaved so prior to Boris. That’s insane.
To mask or not to mask: Modeling the potential for face mask use by the general public to curtail the COVID-19 pandemic https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468042720300117?via=ihub Face mask use by the general public for limiting the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic is controversial, though increasingly recommended, and the potential of this intervention is not well understood. We develop a compartmental model for assessing the community-wide impact of mask use by the general, asymptomatic public, a portion of which may be asymptomatically infectious. Model simulations, using data relevant to COVID-19 dynamics in the US states of New York and Washington, suggest that broad adoption of even relatively ineffective face masks may meaningfully reduce community transmission of COVID-19 and decrease peak hospitalizations and deaths. Moreover, mask use decreases the effective transmission rate in nearly linear proportion to the product of mask effectiveness (as a fraction of potentially infectious contacts blocked) and coverage rate (as a fraction of the general population), while the impact on epidemiologic outcomes (death, hospitalizations) is highly nonlinear, indicating masks could synergize with other non-pharmaceutical measures. Notably, masks are found to be useful with respect to both preventing illness in healthy persons and preventing asymptomatic transmission. Hypothetical mask adoption scenarios, for Washington and New York state, suggest that immediate near universal (80%) adoption of moderately (50%) effective masks could prevent on the order of 17–45% of projected deaths over two months in New York, while decreasing the peak daily death rate by 34–58%, absent other changes in epidemic dynamics. Even very weak masks (20% effective) can still be useful if the underlying transmission rate is relatively low or decreasing: In Washington, where baseline transmission is much less intense, 80% adoption of such masks could reduce mortality by 24–65% (and peak deaths 15–69%), compared to 2–9% mortality reduction in New York (peak death reduction 9–18%). Our results suggest use of face masks by the general public is potentially of high value in curtailing community transmission and the burden of the pandemic. The community-wide benefits are likely to be greatest when face masks are used in conjunction with other non-pharmaceutical practices (such as social-distancing), and when adoption is nearly universal (nation-wide) and compliance is high....
The last bit is sort of stating the obvious. Staying apart from people is probably the most effective way of stopping transmission. If you are doing that, a mask isn't going to do much more.
It may be useful for situations where it is difficult to stay far enough apart though, eg public transport and shops
Regarding treatment protocol for Coronavirus, I am pretty sure that variations on a theme of chloroquin and zinc are the gold standard, despite widespread media hype in the other direction. I follow Dr Berg (keto diet and intermittent fasting) and he has a very methodical way of explaining the science - very much pitched at the layman. This is well worth a watch.
I can only think widespread attempts to discredit this treatment are a result of the early Trump endorsement.
Absent some very surprising randomised clinical trial results, I don't think there's any need to discredit it; there is simply no evidence that it works, and significant evidence of potentially severe side effects.
I've been drinking plenty of G&T just in case quinine helps. But doctors aren't stupid. If there was any evidence this worked, they'd all be using it.
"The London NHS Nightingale hospital is to be put "on standby" as no new coronavirus admissions are expected in the coming days, Downing Street has said.
The prime minister's spokesman said the move was due to limited demand."
No, not enough maths people....I haven't even been through the list properly, just the ones that popped out at me. Clearly a group of retards this lot...
Professor Neil Ferguson - We all know him
Professor Julia Gog - Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics (DAMTP) Mathematics of infectious diseases,viral bioinformatics,influenza modelling
Sir David Spiegelhalter - Very famous Cambridge stats guy
Professor Sir Ian Diamond - National Statistician, Office for National Statistics
Tim Gowers - Cambridge maths professor and Fields Medal winner
Dr Demis Hassabis FRS - All round ML / AI genius and brains behind Deep Mind
These are the types of people that sadly now hold positions of influence in the modern Conservative Party thanks to Bozo and his cabal. If this is true it is an absolute disgrace.
He’s behaved very poorly and that reflects on those that appointed him but you seem to be suggesting no mp in a position of influence had ever behaved so prior to Boris. That’s insane.
So why isn't Johnson throwing this piece of shit out of the party? He had no problem withdrawing the whip from MPs who committed the terrible offence of voting against his government.
No, not enough maths people....I haven't even been through the list properly, just the ones that popped out at me. Clearly a group of retards this lot...
Professor Neil Ferguson - We all know him
Professor Julia Gog - Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics (DAMTP) Mathematics of infectious diseases,viral bioinformatics,influenza modelling
Sir David Spiegelhalter - Very famous Cambridge stats guy
Professor Sir Ian Diamond - National Statistician, Office for National Statistics
Tim Gowers - Cambridge maths professor and Fields Medal winner
Dr Demis Hassabis FRS - All round ML / AI genius and brains behind Deep Mind
These are the types of people that sadly now hold positions of influence in the modern Conservative Party thanks to Bozo and his cabal. If this is true it is an absolute disgrace.
He’s behaved very poorly and that reflects on those that appointed him but you seem to be suggesting no mp in a position of influence had ever behaved so prior to Boris. That’s insane.
He has surrounded himself with a right bunch of shysters though, no bad egg here, they are all rotten to the core to mix my metaphors.
Another good reason for all moderate, non-headbanging Brexit-delusionaries to lend their support to SKS
Wouldn't it be better if he said it was or wasn't ending though ? I mean for clarity.
Sounds like Starmer is keeping the Single Market option open. His strategy seems to be 'Let's not mention Brexit". Either it will blow over or it will go pear shaped, at which point people will be looking for alternatives.
Yes, the next general election looks like continued hard Brexit and WTO terms with Boris or rejoin the single market with Starmer and the LDs and SNP
Which will be one of the reasons, "Boris" as you so lovingly refer to him as, will lose. The main reason will be that Starmer is not Corbyn or "Boris". And Bozo will be grateful, because he will have got the badge that he so longed to have, but he will no longer have to find ways to dodge the hard work
Meanwhile in the real world Boris has already won. If Labour wins after 14 years of Tory governments then so be it.
Sense "Boris" has become like Liverpool FC for you. In which case, fine, but you're on the hook for life. That's what true fandom is. 20 years from now, Liverpool might be wallowing in mid-table mediocrity and "Boris" might be doing a five stretch for something slippery and beyond the pale, but you - you will still have to keep churning out the love. This is the deal so I hope you are going in with eyes open.
You're right. I'm not a glory hunter, I support what I want to through thick and thin. What's wrong with that?
On sports I supported my clubs through thick and thin. I grew up used to disappointments, despite being born early 80s so can barely remember some Liverpool success my memories are more from the 90s.
I grew up in Australia in the 90s a "Pome Bastard" supporting English cricket during The Ashes. I remained an England fan through thick and thin surrounded by Australians in the 1990s. If that didn't break me what makes you think mid table mediocrity will do?
Same in politics. I am an unabashed liberal Conservative, aka a libertarian. I believe in economically dry, socially liberal Conservatives like Thatcher, Cameron and Johnson. I oppose social conservativism or left wing economics and my views don't change to match what the leadership of any particular party says. When May led the party I was vocal in opposition to "my" party because her vicious "Go Home" politics do not represent me.
Here is what you need to ponder. "Boris" is popular with a great many people who are decidedly not "socially liberal". It leaves 3 possibilities.
(i) He IS a social liberal and is fooling his Get Brexit Done base. (ii) He is NOT a social liberal and is fooling you (and those like you). (iii) He is devoid of core belief and is fooling EVERYONE who supports him.
You will be interested to hear that the most likely answer is a (i) with a generous helping of (iii).
What makes you think "Get Brexit Done" is socially illiberal?
What fills me with confidence is decades of listening to him speak. He has consistently been liberal - including during the referendum campaign. He isn't some Farage/IDS/HYUFD social conservative headbanger.
Some Brexit supporters are socially liberal but a large number are not. Those for whom Farage had great appeal, for example. Few social liberals there.
It's a 2+2 = 4 point again, Philip, I'm afraid. Best to just accept it.
You are right Farage is not socially liberal. I despise Farage.
But there is a reason Boris worked with Gove etc in Vote Leave and not Farage etc in Leave.EU - why do you think that is?
Because he is a social liberal fooling his Hard Brexit base. Or possibly devoid of core belief and thus fooling all who support him.
As per my original post. Which is looking impeccable.
Again Hard Brexit is not a social liberal v conservative issue.
Not exclusively. Of course not. Hard Brexiteers are not all Farage types. But lots of them are. And "Boris" managed to appeal to this section of the electorate. Hence Farage killed off and an 80 seat majority. Well done "Boris". To make them think he shares their values and world view when he doesn't took great political skill.
There - if we put it positively like that, so we don't say your hero "fooled" them, we say that it just shows what a "winner" he is, does this make you a teeny bit happier?
Winning depends upon building a big tent yes but he never fooled anyone and never pretended to be (or campaigned with) Farage.
"Boris" Johnson never fooled anyone. Priti Patel is a "social liberal".
These are fabulous. But don't go thinking you can never top them. That way lies decline.
I never said Patel is a social liberal I said she is more liberal than people give her credit for.
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
If the UK gov app works using a 0-day exploit (a software bug that is not generally known about) of the IOS bluetooth stack, as has been reported, Apple absolutely will ban it from the App Store.
Is that confirmed anywhere?
As I understand it, by default, apps can't access Bluetooth LE unless they're actively running, meaning that you need to have the app open. This prevents regular apps from tracking you using Bluetooth LE, or from draining the battery excessively, which is the kind of security we expect Apple and Google to provide. Apple/Google have made available a special feature to support background use of Bluetooth LE for anonymous contact tracing, which governments can use, but the UK government is apparently not using it?
This raises the question of how the app is meant to work at all. If it works by exploiting a security issue, then that means that any other app could be doing the same thing, and you would expect Apple/Google to rectify the security issue promptly. One presumes that GCHQ jealously guards its knowledge of such security loopholes for targeted attacks on important targets, and drawing attention to them in this way would not be ideal for them. It would also justify the otherwise outlandish-seeming claim that there is something "dodgy" about the contact tracing app, precisely the kind of thing that would cause people to avoid using it (by not installing the app, or by switching their phones off or leaving them at home). I find it hard to believe that the UK government would take this approach, though hard-to-believe things happen quite often these days.
I've just started taking on freelance work in the evenings and weekends, despite the fact that I am full-time employed on PAYE.
What's my best option?
Simply go into the SA system and declare the additional income to HMRC or some other mechanism?
Thanks for your views!
You are legally obliged to tell HMRC of any income which is not taxed. So just write to them with details. They may then adjust your PAYE code and/or send you a Self Assessment form at the end of the tax year (assuming that the amount isn't trivial).
No, not enough maths people....I haven't even been through the list properly, just the ones that popped out at me. Clearly a group of retards this lot...
Professor Neil Ferguson - We all know him
Professor Julia Gog - Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics (DAMTP) Mathematics of infectious diseases,viral bioinformatics,influenza modelling
Sir David Spiegelhalter - Very famous Cambridge stats guy
Professor Sir Ian Diamond - National Statistician, Office for National Statistics
Tim Gowers - Cambridge maths professor and Fields Medal winner
Dr Demis Hassabis FRS - All round ML / AI genius and brains behind Deep Mind
On Brexit, I see Govey saying "I'll recruit pen pushers to tie business up in knots of red tape" and see self-styled true conservatives like HYUFD insisting thats a Good Thing. Business is not going to allow any such thing to happen, even the Tories won't be able to withstand Tesco and Jaguar saying "thats us fucked then" as the economy judders along in the midst of the worst recession we have seen in decades.
People voted for Brexit, they didn't vote for the consequences of Brexit. They haven't a clue how the economy works, how trade works, how manufacturing works, how the supply chain works. They are clueless - they just think that The Man has screwed them too many times and they want to Take Back Control for a change.
Local Brexiteers up here want an end to being told what to do by the EU. They don't want to see an end to local shops and for Tesco shelves to be half empty which is exactly what will happen if we leave with No Deal as anyone who knows anything about how it works (not HYUFD then) will tell you with precise detail. So its an empty threat. "But you voted for this" is what Goebbels said in the penultimate scene in Downfall before he shot himself...
Its a fudge. The "surrender" referred to earlier was that the UK surrendered its sovereignty over NI and agreed to place an intra-British border down the Irish Sea. Thats not a win for anyone including the EU so of course noone is celebrating it. That the government say "oh no we haven't" when presented with the treaty which says "oh yes you have" next to Shagger's signature tells you all you need to know.
They know the voters haven't a clue. They know the voters don't care about the details of what Brexit is. So exactly as they did having thrown NI under the buss they will simply declare victory and everyone will Move On. We won't have Free Movement as neither will a post-viral EU. We will have additional checks as they will also have between France and Germany and that sour-faced Patel troll will say its a triumph of Her Policy.
Your post fails in its first paragraph. Tesco and Jaguar won't say "thats us fucked then" as they won't be fucked. In fact Tesco and Jaguar are more than capable of dealing with paperwork which they already deal with for non-EU trade. Its no big deal for them.
The third paragraph is equally absurd. The shelves won't be empty.
The fourth paragraph is nonsense too. NI wasn't surrendered, the protocol requires ongoing Stormont consent to stay in place. Devolution is well established in this nation now.
The second and fifth paragraphs are just ranting and insulting the intelligence of people, it has no actual point.
But apart from that . . .
As I said, you evidently know more about supply chain logistics than supply chains and logistics do. Go ask the Port of Dover what impact all of these checks will have. Don't say "use another port" as it'll be the same there as well" The queues will back up forever, trucks won't get through and that means stuff won't get through. Which means food and car parts.
So yes, they will be fucked. As their industries have detailed.
The Port of Dover have said they can cope. That Port of Dover?
If queues are what you are worried about then coronavirus minimises that risk does it not?
"Doug Bannister, the chief executive at the port of Dover, told a fringe event at the Conservative conference that the government’s assumed drop in traffic under a no-deal scenario would cut £1bn a week from the flow of goods.
He said the port had made extensive preparations for 31 October to function as usual but added: “That’s how critical it is. If there’s a no-deal Brexit, it’s not going to be OK. But people are doing all they can to ensure Britain keeps trading.”
These are the types of people that sadly now hold positions of influence in the modern Conservative Party thanks to Bozo and his cabal. If this is true it is an absolute disgrace.
He’s behaved very poorly and that reflects on those that appointed him but you seem to be suggesting no mp in a position of influence had ever behaved so prior to Boris. That’s insane.
He has surrounded himself with a right bunch of shysters though, no bad egg here, they are all rotten to the core to mix my metaphors.
Considering Burns has been made to resign immediately and was already in the party and had been a PPS under both Cameron and May it seems odd to blame Johnson for his impropriety.
No, not enough maths people....I haven't even been through the list properly, just the ones that popped out at me. Clearly a group of retards this lot...
Professor Neil Ferguson - We all know him
Professor Julia Gog - Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics (DAMTP) Mathematics of infectious diseases,viral bioinformatics,influenza modelling
Sir David Spiegelhalter - Very famous Cambridge stats guy
Professor Sir Ian Diamond - National Statistician, Office for National Statistics
Tim Gowers - Cambridge maths professor and Fields Medal winner
Dr Demis Hassabis FRS - All round ML / AI genius and brains behind Deep Mind
I can't see Tim Gowers on the list.
Firstly, two people asked not to be named on the list. Journalists have reported he was definitely in meetings. Might be a "attended, but not formally on panel".
No, not enough maths people....I haven't even been through the list properly, just the ones that popped out at me. Clearly a group of retards this lot...
Professor Neil Ferguson - We all know him
Professor Julia Gog - Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics (DAMTP) Mathematics of infectious diseases,viral bioinformatics,influenza modelling
Sir David Spiegelhalter - Very famous Cambridge stats guy
Professor Sir Ian Diamond - National Statistician, Office for National Statistics
Tim Gowers - Cambridge maths professor and Fields Medal winner
Dr Demis Hassabis FRS - All round ML / AI genius and brains behind Deep Mind
The biggest concern about this app is that the big brains at google and apple have implemented an API to generate the contacts, but the UK government aren't going to use it as they want a centralised system.
Its a bit like wanting to tune an F1 car and saying you aren't going to use Mclearn or Ferrari engineers, you are going to use Mike the mechanic from down the road.
And then discovering Mike is off so the work is being done by an apprentice who has been there 6 weeks and can just about follow the manual.
I suspect there are going to be a fair few gotchas in the NHS solution that will reduce it's usefulness.
Well the biggest red flag is they had to get GCHQ to "find" a loophole to force IoS to do something that is supposedly not possible (cough cough, digs out an exploit they already use as part of their spying toolbox). It is in regards to control the bluetooth polling, so that it doesn't eat all your battery up.
Now, Apple don't like anybody exploiting their OS for any reason. What happens if they decide to neuter this exploit?
“Apple disables U.K. Coronavirus app.“
How do you spin that headline?
More like UK Coronavirus app never arrives in Apple's Appstore.
Apple prevents UK government releasing us from lockdown
They ain’t going to do that.
If the UK gov app works using a 0-day exploit (a software bug that is not generally known about) of the IOS bluetooth stack, as has been reported, Apple absolutely will ban it from the App Store.
Is that confirmed anywhere?
The BBC reported that experts from the cyber security arm of the spy agency, the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), had "aided the effort".
The committee also asked Gould directly whether UK spy agency, GCHQ, was involved in the decision to choose a centralized approach for the app. The BBC reported yesterday that experts from the cyber security arm of the spy agency, the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), had aided the effort.
At first pass Gould dodged the question. Pressed a second time he dodged a direct answer, saying only that the NCSC was “part of the discussions in which we decided to take the approach that we’ve taken”.
This is again really irresponsible to be publishing leaks on this stuff. Things are still in motion. This is a crucial moment, lots of false reporting or reporting certain rules (which are still under discussion) as fact, will only likely lead to confusion.
I have no problem with posting leaks when governments have shown to lie or mislead the public, but this isn't the case.
This is again really irresponsible to be publishing leaks on this stuff. Things are still in motion. This is a crucial moment, lots of false reporting or reporting certain rules (which are still under discussion) as fact, will only likely lead to confusion.
Don't forget Mark Di Stefano was a previous employee of Buzzgarbage news.
Comments
General Melchett : Filthy hun weasels, fighting their dirty underhand war!
Captain Darling : And fortunately, one of our spies...
General Melchett : Splendid fellows, brave heroes risking life and limb for Blighty!
Some of them are Corbynista yeswomen.
They ain’t going to do that.
No Chinese funnel then. Betting the house on contact tracing.
I think you have an incorrect view of the population at large. Compliance with the lockdown to date demonstrates that.
I think France are going for a similar centralized approach to ours. Anybody else?
I've just started taking on freelance work in the evenings and weekends, despite the fact that I am full-time employed on PAYE.
What's my best option?
Simply go into the SA system and declare the additional income to HMRC or some other mechanism?
Thanks for your views!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_apps
If the government wants to track us permanently they'll need to do more than get us to download an app I will uninstall whenever I want to and certainly by the end of this pandemic.
Remember the Sunday Times "scoop", that claimed an academic was against government policy. His reply was, I wasn't there in that particular meeting and (most importantly), as I wasn't present, I didn't see the data / evidence presented and therefore I am unable to pass informed judgement, so I must defer to the decision made by those who did.
Google and Apple plan to address the take-up and persistent surveillance problems by first distributing the system through operating system updates, and later removing it in the same way once the threat has passed.[32]
If it's going to be less than £1000 I don't believe you have to otherwise you do need to as you will need to fill in a self assessment form. https://www.freelanceuk.com/tax_matters/mistakes-freelancers-make-when-filing-self-assessment-tax-return.shtml has a decent overview.
And as I have said that is moronic. For one thing even if you install the app you can then uninstall it and/or disable Bluetooth. Or turn your phone off. Or turn your phone on airplane mode. Or whatever.
Much ado about nothing.
Clinical classifiers of COVID-19 infection from novel ultra-high-throughput proteomics
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.27.20081810v1.full.pdf
The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented global challenge. Highly variable in its presentation, spread and clinical outcome, novel point-of-care diagnostic classifiers are urgently required. Here, we describe a set of COVID-19 clinical classifiers discovered using a newly designed low-cost high-throughput mass spectrometry-based platform. Introducing a new sample preparation pipeline coupled with short-gradient high-flow liquid chromatography and mass spectrometry, our methodology facilitates clinical implementation and increases sample throughput and quantification precision. Providing a rapid assessment of serum or plasma samples at scale, we report 27 biomarkers that distinguish mild and severe forms of COVID-19, of which some may have potential as therapeutic targets. These proteins highlight the role of complement factors, the coagulation system, inflammation modulators as well as pro-inflammatory signalling upstream and downstream of Interleukin 6. Application of novel methodologies hence transforms proteomics from a research tool into a rapid-response, clinically actionable technology adaptable to infectious outbreaks....
Total belief in a cult is not for me I am afraid, I use my brain and look at the facts.
I am exactly the same with the only Scottish political party as well, I do not slavishly believe all they say, though they are amateurs in respect to the lying cheating Tory mob.
https://order-order.com/2020/05/04/read-full-government-reveals-sage-membership/
So yes, they will be fucked. As their industries have detailed.
These are fabulous. But don't go thinking you can never top them. That way lies decline.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2468042720300117?via=ihub
Face mask use by the general public for limiting the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic is controversial, though increasingly recommended, and the potential of this intervention is not well understood. We develop a compartmental model for assessing the community-wide impact of mask use by the general, asymptomatic public, a portion of which may be asymptomatically infectious. Model simulations, using data relevant to COVID-19 dynamics in the US states of New York and Washington, suggest that broad adoption of even relatively ineffective face masks may meaningfully reduce community transmission of COVID-19 and decrease peak hospitalizations and deaths. Moreover, mask use decreases the effective transmission rate in nearly linear proportion to the product of mask effectiveness (as a fraction of potentially infectious contacts blocked) and coverage rate (as a fraction of the general population), while the impact on epidemiologic outcomes (death, hospitalizations) is highly nonlinear, indicating masks could synergize with other non-pharmaceutical measures. Notably, masks are found to be useful with respect to both preventing illness in healthy persons and preventing asymptomatic transmission. Hypothetical mask adoption scenarios, for Washington and New York state, suggest that immediate near universal (80%) adoption of moderately (50%) effective masks could prevent on the order of 17–45% of projected deaths over two months in New York, while decreasing the peak daily death rate by 34–58%, absent other changes in epidemic dynamics. Even very weak masks (20% effective) can still be useful if the underlying transmission rate is relatively low or decreasing: In Washington, where baseline transmission is much less intense, 80% adoption of such masks could reduce mortality by 24–65% (and peak deaths 15–69%), compared to 2–9% mortality reduction in New York (peak death reduction 9–18%). Our results suggest use of face masks by the general public is potentially of high value in curtailing community transmission and the burden of the pandemic. The community-wide benefits are likely to be greatest when face masks are used in conjunction with other non-pharmaceutical practices (such as social-distancing), and when adoption is nearly universal (nation-wide) and compliance is high....
I had cause to buy something from CeX which resulted in them giving me a voucher for £15. All CeX's vouchers are valid for 1,000 years and a week.
I asked them if they could possibly notify me two weeks before the voucher expires.
If queues are what you are worried about then coronavirus minimises that risk does it not?
Also all the usual international App Store issues - so if I'm in a foreign country who won't put their own app on the UK App Store for GDPR reasons but make it compulsory to download as a condition of entry or access to services, or the NHS app that can't be downloaded by foreign visitors for similar reasons - remembering that tens of millions of people (at least) reside somewhere other than the location of their phone's App Store.
The prime minister's spokesman said the move was due to limited demand."
https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-london-nhs-nightingale-hospital-to-be-placed-on-standby-11982949
It is hard to look at the list and not feel it needs more mathematical modellers or more statisticians.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/apr/24/case-for-transparency-over-sage-has-never-been-clearer
....
No, not enough maths people....I haven't even been through the list properly, just the ones that popped out at me. Clearly a group of retards this lot...
Professor Neil Ferguson - We all know him
Professor Julia Gog - Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics (DAMTP) Mathematics of infectious diseases,viral bioinformatics,influenza modelling
Sir David Spiegelhalter - Very famous Cambridge stats guy
Professor Sir Ian Diamond - National Statistician, Office for National Statistics
Tim Gowers - Cambridge maths professor and Fields Medal winner
Dr Demis Hassabis FRS - All round ML / AI genius and brains behind Deep Mind
Right now I'll go with my previous assumption that it's a reasonable group of respected experts.
As I understand it, by default, apps can't access Bluetooth LE unless they're actively running, meaning that you need to have the app open. This prevents regular apps from tracking you using Bluetooth LE, or from draining the battery excessively, which is the kind of security we expect Apple and Google to provide. Apple/Google have made available a special feature to support background use of Bluetooth LE for anonymous contact tracing, which governments can use, but the UK government is apparently not using it?
This raises the question of how the app is meant to work at all. If it works by exploiting a security issue, then that means that any other app could be doing the same thing, and you would expect Apple/Google to rectify the security issue promptly. One presumes that GCHQ jealously guards its knowledge of such security loopholes for targeted attacks on important targets, and drawing attention to them in this way would not be ideal for them. It would also justify the otherwise outlandish-seeming claim that there is something "dodgy" about the contact tracing app, precisely the kind of thing that would cause people to avoid using it (by not installing the app, or by switching their phones off or leaving them at home). I find it hard to believe that the UK government would take this approach, though hard-to-believe things happen quite often these days.
He said the port had made extensive preparations for 31 October to function as usual but added: “That’s how critical it is. If there’s a no-deal Brexit, it’s not going to be OK. But people are doing all they can to ensure Britain keeps trading.”
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/01/dover-could-lose-1bn-of-trade-a-week-with-no-deal-brexit
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52441428
-----
The committee also asked Gould directly whether UK spy agency, GCHQ, was involved in the decision to choose a centralized approach for the app. The BBC reported yesterday that experts from the cyber security arm of the spy agency, the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC), had aided the effort.
At first pass Gould dodged the question. Pressed a second time he dodged a direct answer, saying only that the NCSC was “part of the discussions in which we decided to take the approach that we’ve taken”.
https://techcrunch.com/2020/04/28/uks-coronavirus-contacts-tracing-app-could-ask-users-to-share-location-data/
I have no problem with posting leaks when governments have shown to lie or mislead the public, but this isn't the case.