Will you download the contact tracing app?

CBear1993

Won’t be downloading it ever. Don’t know anyone in my family or social circle that has done either.

robinph

CBear1993 wrote: »

Won’t be downloading it ever. Don’t know anyone in my family or social circle that has done either.

Any particular reason for not downloading it?

CBear1993

Because I don’t want to?

Heading to Switzerland tomorrow and heading to Portugal in a few weeks. I like to keep the apps on my phone to a minimum.

joebloggs32

CBear1993 wrote: »

Won’t be downloading it ever. Don’t know anyone in my family or social circle that has done either.

I must definitely operate in different social circles to you.
All my family and anyone I know has it. One of my friends told me his brother in law wouldn't download it as he was afraid Google would track him....we all cracked up laughing at it!

CBear1993

Im well enough informed in apps, privacy and analytics on phones these days to know that any fool who says their reason for not downloading it is that they don’t want to be tracked by the government - they’re akin to the 5G brigade.

That’s not my reason for not having it. I was born in a rebel pit of rebellious , muck-eating, raw heures on the side of a mountain.

I guess we do then. My family and friends extend out to Kildare, Dublin and Ulster, so it’s not like we’re in a corner of rural Ireland .

Its this kind of nonsense that means I need to acknowledge data protection and cookies all the time!

There's a place in hell for the people that made that necessary

robinph

CBear1993 wrote: »

Because I don’t want to?

Heading to Switzerland tomorrow and heading to Portugal in a few weeks. I like to keep the apps on my phone to a minimum.

Would seem like a great time to download the Irish app before getting on a plane with a bunch of Irish people from who knows where, and then be ready to download the Swiss and Portuguese app(not sure if they have one) in the event that you get ill and are tested whilst out there.

Don't think it makes any difference which app you are running in the background, just the one for the country that you are tested in will be needed when tested.



Can't be bothered isn't really a very good reason not to run the app though.

CBear1993

Where did I say I can’t be bothered?

Thanks for update. I’ll keep it in mind

robinph

KyussB wrote: »

Right. Comfortable does not equal unconcerned about privacy. Perhaps why they included an answer, to specifically say unconcerned...

... And not ticking the "unconcerned" box on a question being asked to people who are happy to run location tracking apps on their phone does not equal "concerned".

plodder

KyussB wrote: »

People accepting a privacy tradeoff in return for a convenience - doesn't mean they don't care. The survey appears to consider this, and specifically count those who are unconcerned/don't-care.

Great. Then we are agreed on that. Most people are happy to enable location services on balance so there are no additional threats related to tracking from this app or from play services for those people.

CBear1993

CBear1993 wrote: »

Won’t be downloading it ever. Don’t know anyone in my family or social circle that has done either.

CBear1993 wrote: »

Because I don’t want to?

Heading to Switzerland tomorrow and heading to Portugal in a few weeks. I like to keep the apps on my phone to a minimum.

CBear1993 wrote: »

Im well enough informed in apps, privacy and analytics on phones these days to know that any fool who says their reason for not downloading it is that they don’t want to be tracked by the government - they’re akin to the 5G brigade.

That’s not my reason for not having it. I was born in a rebel pit of rebellious , muck-eating, raw heures on the side of a mountain.

I guess we do then. My family and friends extend out to Kildare, Dublin and Ulster, so it’s not like we’re in a corner of rural Ireland .

Bit confused here. You understand it's harmless yet won't use it?

KyussB

KyussB wrote: »

An Android problem relevant to users of the app.

Relevent to Android users who use any apps that use bluetooth low energy scanning, for example with your Fitbit

KyussB

robinph wrote: »

... And not ticking the "unconcerned" box on a question being asked to people who are happy to run location tracking apps on their phone does not equal "concerned".

I didn't say it does. The poster citing the survey, was making the hard claim that the majority of people don't care i.e. are unconcerned.

CBear1993

Deleted User wrote: »

Bit confused here. You understand it's harmless yet won't use it?

What’s the issue ?

KyussB

plodder wrote: »

Great. Then we are agreed on that. Most people are happy to enable location services on balance so there are no additional threats related to tracking from this app or from play services for those people.

Enabling location services does not equal agreeing to enable the OS Location Accuracy setting - so that does not support your claim.

robinph

KyussB wrote: »

I didn't say it does. The poster citing the survey, was making the hard claim that the majority of people don't care i.e. are unconcerned.

So what point exactly were you trying to make with this statement?

KyussB wrote: »

Your links show the opposite of what you claim, and backs my point - that only 25% who are comfortable with location tracking , are unconcerned.

That line sounds very much like a claim that 75% of people are uncomfortable with location tracking.

Expecting a denial of having said something or other in 3..2..1..

KyussB

That what the poster cited does not back up the claim that a majority don't care...............

If you're so concerned about keeping the thread on topic, to the point that you try to police what can and can't be discussed in the thread, why the fuck are you spinning this off-topic tangent in circles, for no reason?

plodder

KyussB wrote: »

Enabling location services does not equal agreeing to enable the OS Location Accuracy setting - so that does not support your claim.

Location accuracy is enabled by default apparently - that is the issue people are complaining about. Obviously, when it's switched off, the issue does not apply.

So, yes it does.

KyussB

plodder wrote: »

Location accuracy is enabled by default apparently - that is the issue people are complaining about. Obviously, when it's switched off, the issue does not apply.

So, yes it does.

Again, people turning on location services does not mean that they agree with Location Accuracy being on - and being unaware it is on doesn't mean they agree with it either - so no, your claim using a survey about location services does not apply to Location Accuracy...

It's strange how the discussion quickly went from debating over whether or not there are privacy issues - into a discussion of claims that a majority don't care about privacy issues...

It's like posters don't give a toss about actual/real privacy issues - just want to downplay all concerns about privacy, even when perfectly valid and published by prominent sources.

CBear1993

CBear1993 wrote: »

What’s the issue ?

Fair enough. Seems like an odd stance to take on it. I wouldn't expect someone so ambivalent about it to be bothered to post on a forum about it too.

plodder

KyussB wrote: »

Again, people turning on location services does not mean that they agree with Location Accuracy being on - and being unaware it is on doesn't mean they agree with it either - so no, your claim using a survey about location services does not apply to Location Accuracy...

It's strange how the discussion quickly went from debating over whether or not there are privacy issues - into a discussion of claims that a majority don't care about privacy issues...

But, I've agreed with you twice already that people do care about privacy. Yet, you keep coming back to the 'point' above in bold.

It's like posters don't give a toss about actual/real privacy issues - just want to downplay all concerns about privacy, even when perfectly valid and published by prominent sources.

No, it's when people disagree with you and provide evidence that you don't want to see.

I stand over my point that most people are happy to use location services, for whatever reason they have, and my point is for the most part they are right.

It's at least consistent that if you are happy to give your data/location to third party apps, then it's actually less invasive in my opinion to give your data/location to Google, so long as they continue to use it in the way they say they will.

Eg what a lot of people don't realise is when google targets third party ads at you, they aren't revealing anything about you to the third party. All they are doing is delivering a bunch of ads to a group of people with the same interests, but who remain unknown to the third party. That is how they make their money. By keeping the data private, they can monetize it over and over.

fly_agaric

KyussB wrote: »

It's like posters don't give a toss about actual/real privacy issues - just want to downplay all concerns about privacy, even when perfectly valid and published by prominent sources.

KyussB, there's privacy issues around having a smartphone on you at all times and using Google and Apple's services, and there's further issues around the power that these 2 companies have amassed but you (like Irish council for civil liberties "concerned" legal expert types) decide to hop off this particular application.

I assume it is because its extremely topical and they can raise their profile and push their own hobby horses (privacy) off the back of it. They (and you...) don't really care that the efforts may discourage people from using it & damage public health.

I suppose it is one of those prices of a free society things even if I personally find it fairly infuriating.

ExMachina1000

I would rather Google have my data than the Irish government

robinph

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

I would rather Google have my data than the Irish government

Which is fine then as the Irish government doesn't get any data from the contact tracing app, other than your phone number if you test positive and agree to give it to them.

CBear1993

robinph wrote: »

Which is fine then as the Irish government doesn't get any data from the contact tracing app, other than your phone number if you test positive and agree to give it to them.

How much commission are you getting for each new download?

I suppose you want people to wear masks outdoors as well?

jimmycrackcorm

KyussB wrote: »

I didn't say it does. The poster citing the survey, was making the hard claim that the majority of people don't care i.e. are unconcerned.

People are unconcerned. Otherwise, how else would google maps know where live traffic delays are.

KyussB

plodder wrote: »

But, I've agreed with you twice already that people do care about privacy. Yet, you keep coming back to the 'point' above in bold.

No, it's when people disagree with you and provide evidence that you don't want to see.

I stand over my point that most people are happy to use location services, for whatever reason they have, and my point is for the most part they are right.

It's at least consistent that if you are happy to give your data/location to third party apps, then it's actually less invasive in my opinion to give your data/location to Google, so long as they continue to use it in the way they say they will.

Eg what a lot of people don't realise is when google targets third party ads at you, they aren't revealing anything about you to the third party. All they are doing is delivering a bunch of ads to a group of people with the same interests, but who remain unknown to the third party. That is how they make their money. By keeping the data private, they can monetize it over and over.

There is nothing backing this bolded part. Allowing apps to access your location does not equal agreeing to your location being sent to third parties - even though there is crossover with apps that do send location info to third parties - and it's not equivalent with agreeing with your location being sent to Google.

You're drawing multiple false equivalencies, trying to pretend that a survey answering question A, answers a completely different question B - when it does not.

KyussB

fly_agaric wrote: »

KyussB, there's privacy issues around having a smartphone on you at all times and using Google and Apple's services, and there's further issues around the power that these 2 companies have amassed but you (like Irish council for civil liberties "concerned" legal expert types) decide to hop off this particular application.

I assume it is because its extremely topical and they can raise their profile and push their own hobby horses (privacy) off the back of it. They (and you...) don't really care that the efforts may discourage people from using it & damage public health.

I suppose it is one of those prices of a free society things even if I personally find it fairly infuriating.

That's whataboutery. Who said I'm not concerned about other privacy issues? Is this thread about the covid app, or is it about all other privacy issues including those unrelated to the app? Given that it's about the covid app, why would I discuss other unrelated privacy issues - rather than issues related to use of the app?

KyussB

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

People are unconcerned. Otherwise, how else would google maps know where live traffic delays are.

Accepting a privacy tradeoff in return for convenience, does not equal being unconcerned about privacy.

CBear1993

CBear1993 wrote: »

How much commission are you getting for each new download?

I suppose you want people to wear masks outdoors as well?

Now you are berating people for defending this app... I'm starting to not believe your reason for not using it