'Big Brother' policing: appropriate to Covid-19 ?

[Drummond]

One of the UK's many police forces decided to adopt what might be called a 'Big Brother' approach to managing citizens' movements during this Covid-19 crisis.

With the imperative given to it by the UK Government to police peoples' movements ... and to disperse large gatherings, and fine transgressors ... Derbyshire Police, which has within its jurisdiction the Peak District, a large area of countryside, thought that sending drones to record transgressions, then to put the footage in the public domain (Twitter) along with advisory commentary, might be a 'good idea'.

It generated a lot of controversy .. was it too heavy-handed, an example of Police State behaviour ?

I'm wondering how Americans will view this. A good idea, or, going too far ?

Let's see !!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbvWniXcNhA

[jimnyc]

We have quite a many areas being monitored via drone and using speakers to tell everyone about distancing, or to tell them to go home. But I haven't seen them posting the folks online and shaming them or trying to identify them - yet.

They should use them to maybe disperse people instead of simply video taping them and posting it.

[Drummond]

We have quite a many areas being monitored via drone and using speakers to tell everyone about distancing, or to tell them to go home. But I haven't seen them posting the folks online and shaming them or trying to identify them - yet.

They should use them to maybe disperse people instead of simply video taping them and posting it.

Agreed !

I think the Derbyshire police did things this way just to get people to comply, without the further need for drones .. trying to save themselves some work ! It was, after all, a form of 'shaming' of the activity photographed, done for effect.

Differing police forces have adopted draconian or lax methods, depending on the force in question. Some have racked up hundreds of on-the-spot fines. The Metropolitan Police, serving London (the last time I checked) hadn't gone so far as to fine anybody at all.

The 'drone surveillance' method drew a lot of adverse commentary, though. It, overall, was hotly resented.

But, Derbyshire do prefer their draconian actions.

Here's something else they tried:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11278109/cornavirus-cops-lagoon-peak-district-lockdown/


COPS have dumped black dye into a beauty spot blue lagoon to stop Instagrammers posing for snaps during the coronavirus lockdown.

Derbyshire Police tipped gallons of the dye into the water near Harpur Hill, Buxton, in a bid to deter the public from flocking there to take Instagram pics.

The force, who were accused of being "over-zealous" for tracking dog walkers with drones this week, revealed they had chucked black dye into the picturesque Peak District tourist hotspot to deter gatherings.

Dye is added to the stunning blue water every summer to deter swimmers, as the water has a pH almost as strong as bleach and the water can cause skin complaints.

But with the sun out during the coronavirus lockdown this weekend, cops decided to act early this year to try to deter lockdown day-trippers.

They wrote on Facebook: "Yesterday we received reports that people were congregating at the ‘Blue Lagoon’ in Harpur Hill, Buxton.

No doubt this is due to the picturesque location and the lovely weather (for once) in Buxton. However, the location is dangerous and this type of gathering is in contravention of the current instruction of the UK Government.

"With this in mind, we have attended the location this morning and used water dye to make the water look less appealing."

[Gunny]

One of the UK's many police forces decided to adopt what might be called a 'Big Brother' approach to managing citizens' movements during this Covid-19 crisis.

With the imperative given to it by the UK Government to police peoples' movements ... and to disperse large gatherings, and fine transgressors ... Derbyshire Police, which has within its jurisdiction the Peak District, a large area of countryside, thought that sending drones to record transgressions, then to put the footage in the public domain (Twitter) along with advisory commentary, might be a 'good idea'.

It generated a lot of controversy .. was it too heavy-handed, an example of Police State behaviour ?

I'm wondering how Americans will view this. A good idea, or, going too far ?

Let's see !!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JbvWniXcNhAI don't know that it is a "good" idea, but so long as it's warnings, I would say it's up to the violators not to put themselves in the position to be pointed out.

We have cameras all over here and in some places they use them to ticket (fine) people running red lights.

I think all of this crap is heavy-handed and I don't like it. It's definitely "Big Brother". At the same time, I can understand that the rest of us get to suffer because of the idiots. Most of our laws work that way.

[Drummond]

I don't know that it is a "good" idea, but so long as it's warnings, I would say it's up to the violators not to put themselves in the position to be pointed out.

We have cameras all over here and in some places they use them to ticket (fine) people running red lights.

I think all of this crap is heavy-handed and I don't like it. It's definitely "Big Brother". At the same time, I can understand that the rest of us get to suffer because of the idiots. Most of our laws work that way.

I suppose there's the point that those people going for walks in the Peak District, arranged an environment for themselves where there was nobody within 500 yards of them (.. so 'distancing' was well and truly observed !). Besides, anyone making that journey is one less person to be a 'distancing' risk for anyone else walking around in areas far more densely populated.

I view that as 'win-win'. Who loses out ?

[Gunny]

I suppose there's the point that those people going for walks in the Peak District, arranged an environment for themselves where there was nobody within 500 yards of them (.. so 'distancing' was well and truly observed !). Besides, anyone making that journey is one less person to be a 'distancing' risk for anyone else walking around in areas far more densely populated.

I view that as 'win-win'. Who loses out ?I still walk and sometimes run. Zero-dark-thirty, Thermos mug in hand. Few people out and I can walk down the middle of the street. Unless a trip is required to the store and I do them at the crack of dawn as well when few are out, I just stay home.

In my neighborhood at least, most everyone I see is complying. The ones that are not are almost uniformly the younger crowd. They like to make fun of old people but I wonder if their 2 brain cells get past the part that we're old and to the part that we MADE IT to old and we perhaps are not the dummies :)

[Kathianne]

If I missed this, sorry! Who's for opting out?

https://hotair.com/archives/allahpundit/2020/04/10/go-apple-google-joining-forces-track-peoples-movements-order-contain-epidemic/


Here We Go: Apple And Google Joining Forces To Track People’s Movements In Order To Contain The Epidemic
ALLAHPUNDITPosted at 5:21 pm on April 10, 2020

This is like the Keymaster and the Gatekeeper getting together in “Ghostbusters.” Something awe-inspiring is about to happen annnnnd probably not in a good way.


But it’s good news under the circumstances, he said to himself, a sinking feeling in his stomach.




Our current predicament is difficult but straightforward:


1. We need to get the economy going at the earliest conceivable moment it’s safe to do so.


2. There are two prerequisites to doing that, according to every infectious disease specialist in creation. First, we need to make testing widely available so that we can catch new cases early, before they turn into new outbreaks. Second, we need a system of contact tracing so that those who’ve been in recent proximity to a person who’s just tested positive can immediately be notified to self-isolate. If we can manage both, the public can go back to work and only those at special risk need to be removed from the labor force for a few weeks at a time.


3. Contact tracing traditionally requires lots of manpower to interview people, catalog their interactions, and reach out to those with whom they’ve been in contact. We don’t have that manpower.


4. Contact tracing also requires good administration. We don’t have good administration. We have the opposite. Some of our nurses wear garbage bags to protect themselves from infection because we can’t get them anything better, for cripes sake. If we leave it to the federal government to build an effective contact tracing system, this country will look like “The Stand” by Election Day.


Fortunately, in an age in which we all carry a device that tracks our movements, contact tracing can now be done remotely with scarcely any manpower required. And because those devices are built by competent private entities, not the federal garbage-bag government, this form of contact tracing is likely to work. If we can build out testing soonish to support the new system, we could be in a position to reopen the economy sooner than we think. It’s good news.


The only catch is that it means granting two of the world’s tech behemoths minute-by-minute updates on our movements *and* our health status. And, in so doing, triggering a cultural shift in which we’ll all be less reluctant to provide information like that to authorities forever after.


Anyway, big, big news:


A number of leading public health authorities, universities, and NGOs around the world have been doing important work to develop opt-in contact tracing technology. To further this cause, Apple and Google will be launching a comprehensive solution that includes application programming interfaces (APIs) and operating system-level technology to assist in enabling contact tracing. Given the urgent need, the plan is to implement this solution in two steps while maintaining strong protections around user privacy.


First, in May, both companies will release APIs that enable interoperability between Android and iOS devices using apps from public health authorities. These official apps will be available for users to download via their respective app stores.


Second, in the coming months, Apple and Google will work to enable a broader Bluetooth-based contact tracing platform by building this functionality into the underlying platforms. This is a more robust solution than an API and would allow more individuals to participate, if they choose to opt in, as well as enable interaction with a broader ecosystem of apps and government health authorities. Privacy, transparency, and consent are of utmost importance in this effort, and we look forward to building this functionality in consultation with interested stakeholders. We will openly publish information about our work for others to analyze.


If I understand that correctly, they’re going to roll this out quickly by first providing it as an app available for download — called Contact Tracing, neatly enough. Then, in stage two, they’re going to build it right into the iOS and Android operating systems while providing some sort of option to opt out. That’ll deliver the software to three billion people or so. An obvious early question: How thorough will the “opt out” be, exactly? Given how much personal information is collected surreptitiously by tech companies already, it’s impossible to believe that the movements of opt-outs won’t be quietly tracked too. The “opt out” might prevent you from being alerted if someone you’ve been in contact with is sick, but no one wants to opt out of that part. It’s the movement tracking to which some will object. Is that realistically preventable once it’s built into the OS? Is there any doubt that eventually the default setting on contact tracing will be to turn it on and force users to turn it off?


To assure the public that their privacy will be protected, Apple and Google say they’ll build encryption into the movement data. What might that look like in practice? A few days ago the Atlantic described how Germany is handling the problem:


Buermeyer told me that one possibility is to program phones to broadcast a different ID every 30 minutes. So, for example, if I went to Starbucks in the morning, my phone would broadcast one ID over Bluetooth to all the other phones in the café. An hour later, at lunch with a friend, it would broadcast a different ID to all the other phones at the restaurant. Throughout the day, my phone would also receive and save IDs and log them in an encrypted Rolodex.


Days later, if I were diagnosed with the coronavirus, my doctor would ask me to upload my app’s data to a central server. That server would go through my encrypted Rolodex and find all of the temporary IDs I had collected. An algorithm would match the temporary IDs to something called a push token—a unique code that connects each phone to the app. It could then send each phone an automated message through the app: PLEASE BE ADVISED: We have determined that in the past few days, you may have interacted with somebody … At no point in this entire process would anybody’s identity be known to either the government or the tech companies operating the central server.


The Apple/Google app also won’t disclose identities or locations in informing people that they’ve been in contact with someone who’s sick. All you’ll know is that you may have been exposed and it’s time to hunker down for a few weeks. In fact, enlarge the images in this tweet and you’ll see that the Apple/Google system will function very similarly to the German one:




Benedict Evans
✔
@benedictevans
Apple/Google partner on automatic, anonymised bluetooth-based contact tracing. Very clever.




I think most people will opt in. Why not, if it means we exit this national nightmare sooner rather than later? Even if some opt out for privacy reasons, there are likely to be enough opting in that partial surveillance will allow us to cut down on outbreaks dramatically anyway. The head of NIH wrote about the potential for smart phones to help beat pandemics just yesterday and noted that “researchers estimate that about 60 percent of new COVID-19 cases in a community would need to be detected — and roughly the same percentage of contacts traced — to squelch the spread of the deadly virus.” Can we get to 60 percent opt-ins? Easily, I suspect, given the tremendous costs of a sustained epidemic.


Why, by next year we may be so comfortable with the system that they’ll expand it to track flu transmissions too. Better public hygiene through total information awareness! Imagine how much good an Apple/Google herpes tracker app might do. Coming in 2025, probably.


Two points in closing. One: American businesses will need to prepare for a *lot* more sick leave for employees, including employees who end up not actually being sick. If you get an alert that you’ve been in touch with someone who’s tested positive, you’re supposed to self-quarantine for a period. You might not be infected, of course; it’s a precaution in case you are. Potentially people could be forced off the job repeatedly over the course of a year because they had the bad luck of repeatedly running into people who came down with COVID-19 in the preceding days. There’ll be a strong economic incentive for all workers to eliminate all unnecessary contacts with other people until a vaccine is available, purely for the sake of being able to work steadily. But then, given that social distancing is our only defense against infection, that incentive exists already.


Two: None of this works without widely available testing. Trump may not grasp that but everyone else should. The whole point of contact tracing is to identify sick people quickly and then reach out to those with whom they’ve been in contact to isolate them before the virus spreads further. If we’re not testing abundantly, that system breaks down on the very first step. It makes me wonder what happens if we can’t build out testing quickly enough. Will the app allow people to “self-report” possible cases of COVID-19? For example, might there be an option available to notify your recent contacts if you’re currently suffering from fever, dry cough, and chills even though you haven’t been able to get tested? That would be an even bigger nightmare for employers since it could create a cascade of absences without a single confirmed case of coronavirus. And some sociopaths out there would doubtless abuse the system by claiming to have symptoms when they really don’t just to mess with people. But if the guiding principle in contact tracing is “better safe than sorry,” well, better safe than sorry.

[Black Diamond]

I will opt out. Quickly.

[Black Diamond]

I still walk and sometimes run. Zero-dark-thirty, Thermos mug in hand. Few people out and I can walk down the middle of the street. Unless a trip is required to the store and I do them at the crack of dawn as well when few are out, I just stay home.

In my neighborhood at least, most everyone I see is complying. The ones that are not are almost uniformly the younger crowd. They like to make fun of old people but I wonder if their 2 brain cells get past the part that we're old and to the part that we MADE IT to old and we perhaps are not the dummies :)

OK boomer. :cool:

[Black Diamond]

I still walk and sometimes run. Zero-dark-thirty, Thermos mug in hand. Few people out and I can walk down the middle of the street. Unless a trip is required to the store and I do them at the crack of dawn as well when few are out, I just stay home.

In my neighborhood at least, most everyone I see is complying. The ones that are not are almost uniformly the younger crowd. They like to make fun of old people but I wonder if their 2 brain cells get past the part that we're old and to the part that we MADE IT to old and we perhaps are not the dummies :)

Seriously The younger folks are the ones not following the suggestions. Some of it is teenagers who apparently shouldn't be allowed outside because they are not following the guidelines. Parents maybe should be keeping closer tabs on them?? Hope the kids don't head to grandmas after being In a group of 20.

[Drummond]

I still walk and sometimes run. Zero-dark-thirty, Thermos mug in hand. Few people out and I can walk down the middle of the street. Unless a trip is required to the store and I do them at the crack of dawn as well when few are out, I just stay home.

In my neighborhood at least, most everyone I see is complying. The ones that are not are almost uniformly the younger crowd. They like to make fun of old people but I wonder if their 2 brain cells get past the part that we're old and to the part that we MADE IT to old and we perhaps are not the dummies :)

Their answer to that last point of yours would be to simply (if also ignorantly) say: Covid-19 is an old person's disease. Old people are prey to it, far more than we youngsters.

If arrogant enough, they might well take the attitude that it's time the elderly made way for the young.

I think I'm seeing that in my own society, at least.

Your regime would work well in the UK, and - for now - our police would be satisfied with you. However ... people have been venturing out more, and in ways lacking disciplined consideration for others, in these recent days .. because we are having mini-heatwave conditions right now.

Our Government has hinted it's prepared to get a lot tougher if such a trend continues.

[SassyLady]

Opt out.

[Drummond]

Opt out.

The British approach to tracking seems both straightforward, and yet confused (.. for now !).

Phone providers (at least, it's true of ours) collect data on the locations of their users. Simply, all that needs happen here is that our Government asks each provider to feed it their data.

Whether they ARE doing so, is where some confusion seemingly lies. One provider, O2, was reportedly doing that. They deny they were.

As for British Telecom (BT) ...

https://www.thesun.co.uk/tech/11214992/o2-denies-government-coronavirus-location-lockdown-plot/


--According to The Guardian, BT, which owns EE, is currently in talks with the UK Government regarding revealing location data to see if people are heeding coronavirus advice.

It's said that this information wouldn't be in real-time but could still show patterns of where people are and could be used to send health alerts to specific regions.

A BT spokesperson told the publication: "We are talking with the government about a number of areas in which we may be able to assist with the national public health effort.

"In relation to the use of mobile data, we are still actively exploring possibilities."

The spokesperson added: "As always, we are mindful of the privacy of our customers, while making sure we do everything that might help the medical authorities in the fight against coronavirus."

Sky News previously said that the government had asked O2 to reveal the location data of its users but reports of this were soon deleted.

According to the Metro, an O2 spokesperson said the report was "not true and not representative of how all phone networks are being asked to help the government".

The spokesperson revealed that companies are only in talks about revealing data but this has not happened yet.

They stressed that if location data was to be revealed then it would be broad mass movements and not on an individual basis.

The spokesman added: "We are fully engaged in helping in the fight against COVID-19.

"Besides zero rating access to NHS and other support websites, we were asked along with other mobile operators to support those who are working tirelessly to map and control the spread of coronavirus in the UK.

"Using our mobile technology, we have the potential to build models that help to predict broadly how the virus might move.

"This would in no way be able to identify or map individuals, and operates within strict privacy guidelines."

Here, our Government would consider that the very status of 'national emergency' would entitle them to gather data from each private Company, as the overriding 'permission' for its being gathered ... we're easily technologically competent to manage this in a comprehensive fashion. But, it wouldn't be REAL TIME tracking ... we're told, and not of identifiable individuals.

I'm guessing that the technology is in place to allow individual tracking in real-time right now. We have to rely on advice given which says it's not being accessed.

It only needs to work in tandem with any newer programs out there specifically designed to address Covid-19 to give the Government what it is bound to ask for. If it felt it needed to, it would. This isn't a matter, ultimately, of 'opting in' or 'opting out' .. more a matter of our Government, in the UK, doing what it feels it must to manage a health emergency.