> On 13 Mar 2020, at 15:50, Steven Clift <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> Any thoughts?

It is possible to both track infectious agents and measure the effect on 
behavior with a Privacy by Design app. 
The false positive problem is reduced because the proximity data is generated 
by the phones communicating directly with each other.
I published a paper showing how to deal with inapparent infection over twenty 
years ago:

Stodolsky, D. S. (1997). Automation of Contagion Vigilance. Methods of 
Information in Medicine, 36(3), 220-232.  

https://sites.google.com/a/secureid.net/dss/automation-of-contagion-vigilance 
<https://sites.google.com/a/secureid.net/dss/automation-of-contagion-vigilance>


A small study showed acceptability of the approach:

Stodolsky, D. S. & Zaharia, C. N. (2009). Acceptance of Virus Radar. The 
European Journal of ePractice, 8, 77-93. URL  

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_zxYlTkSnKQZXFsXzNwSDd3ZGs 
<https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B_zxYlTkSnKQZXFsXzNwSDd3ZGs> 


After a half a dozen attempts to get funding, I gave up on the idea of a 
contagion management test. After the #MeToo media explosion, I decided that I 
might pursue a test by focussing on the frontend of the design. A successful 
workshop led nowhere. I continue to seek an alternative strategy for funding 
this research. 


——

There are two things that are needed for virus radar to function. First, the 
infectious agent must be tracked. In the simplest case, when two phones come 
within a few meters of each other they exchange information in order to record 
the risky contact. This pairing info is then transferred to a database that can 
be used to track the potentially infective contacts. This kind of tracking was 
demonstrated in the DTU/KU project headed by Sune Lehmann Jørgensen:

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0130824 
<https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0130824>

“In the scientific realm, the mobility patterns of entire social systems are 
important for modeling spreading of epidemics on multiple scales: metropolitan 
networks [7–9] and global air traffic networks [10, 11]; traffic forecasting 
[12]; understanding fundamental laws governing our lives, such as regularity 
[13], stability [14], and predictability [15]. ”

The code from this project could be repurposed for virus radar real-time 
tracking. 


The second issue is how to use the risk information. Once a person has been 
tested positive for Covid-19, that user can be marked as a confirmed case that 
is to be avoided by at-risk persons. In the simplest case, an open database 
makes it possible to search for the ID of any person (actually their phone ID) 
in order to determine if they are infected. A more advance search would 
indicate if the person had been in contact with a (now) known infected person, 
etc. This is the strategy apparently used in S. Korea, China, etc. for 
tracking. However, it isn’t likely that the population of Denmark would fully 
cooperate, due to the total lack of privacy that a system like this requires. 
The result would be massive stigmatization. At-risk persons would flee at the 
approach of anyone not unmarked in the database.  


What I suggest in the paper is that all risk data be anonymized via the 
assignment of a random number to each risky contact. Once a person was tested 
positive, these numbers from their phone would be broadcast to the entire 
population. If your phone recognized a broadcast number as matching a risky 
contact in your phone, this would indicate you had been exposed to the 
infectious agent. You would then report for testing, assuming a system based 
upon voluntary cooperation. In order to ensure cooperation, health certificates 
would be broadcast to all users on a daily basis. If a person did not report 
for testing, however, they would not get a fresh certificate. At-risk person’s 
phones would automatically check the digitally signed certificate of an 
approaching person. An alert would be issued, if any approaching person could 
not be confirmed as safe. I show how to do this without stigmatization using 
privacy-preserving negotiation in the appendix of the paper. A multi-stage 
“failsafe flirting” model is outlined in my workshop abstract:

https://groups.io/g/MedicalEthics/message/5 
<https://groups.io/g/MedicalEthics/message/5>

Anyone interested in helping develop this model, should subscribe to the list. 
This will give access to the files area that contains slides from the 
presentation, etc. 


dss

David Stodolsky, PhD                   Institute for Social Informatics
Tornskadestien 2, st. th., DK-2400 Copenhagen NV, Denmark
[email protected]          Tel./Signal: +45 3095 4070



-- 
Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable from any major commercial 
search engine. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: 
https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt. Unsubscribe, change to digest 
mode, or change password by emailing [email protected].

Reply via email to