Re: [LINK] "Mobile phone location data used to track Australians' movements during coronavirus crisis"
On 5/4/20 9:41 am, Christian Heinrich wrote: https://www.smh.com.au/technology/mobile-phone-location-data-used-to-track-australians-movements-during-coronavirus-crisis-20200404-p54h09.html My comments on the privacy list were as follows: [The two diagrams show the degree of compliance that's been achieved with the governments' urgings for spatial isolation and reduced movement. [It's a bit chilling how successful it's been in Australia: https://e.infogr.am/sydney-movement-citymapper-1h8n6mz8x9pv2xo?live?parent_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.smh.com.au%2Ftechnology%2Fmobile-phone-location-data-used-to-track-australians-movements-during-coronavirus-crisis-20200404-p54h09.html&src=embed#async_embed [But it's been achieved in Australia by 'moral suasion', with very measured use of authoritarian speech, and even more carefully measured use of authoritarian action. [So far, despite my degree of scepticism about several aspects of the nature of the epidemic, touch wood, Australia and its government has behaved in an eminently civilised manner.] [The Vodafone move is above all a corporate strategic PR play, to get its name in front of the Australian public in a positive way. It's been done a sufficiently long time after the last really bad news about Vodafone that it could well help reverse the company's fortunes. [The privacy negatives arising from the data disclosure appear to be pretty limited - although, as always, the devil's in the detail that the public isn't being told. [The privacy negatives arising from the possession by Vodafone, Optus and Telstra of the underlying, identified data are vast. [Totalitarian governments, and wannabes like Dutton and the shaven-headed brigade in a range of Canberra agencies, are salivating at the prospect of normalising the expropriation and exploitation of such data. [So this reminds us all how fragile democracies already are. And how quickly the moves will be by future Hitlers / Lenins-Stalins / Pol Pots / PRC supremos / Saudi, Central Asian and African dictators / etc.] -- Roger Clarkemailto:roger.cla...@xamax.com.au T: +61 2 6288 6916 http://www.xamax.com.au http://www.rogerclarke.com Xamax Consultancy Pty Ltd 78 Sidaway St, Chapman ACT 2611 AUSTRALIA Visiting Professor in the Faculty of LawUniversity of N.S.W. Visiting Professor in Computer ScienceAustralian National University ___ Link mailing list Link@mailman.anu.edu.au http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
[LINK] "Mobile phone location data used to track Australians' movements during coronavirus crisis"
https://www.smh.com.au/technology/mobile-phone-location-data-used-to-track-australians-movements-during-coronavirus-crisis-20200404-p54h09.html -- Regards, Christian Heinrich http://cmlh.id.au/contact ___ Link mailing list Link@mailman.anu.edu.au http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
Re: [LINK] r/Physics: ethics of putting out a preprint outside our immediate area of expertise during a major public health crisis
On 3/4/20 9:57 pm, Glen Turner wrote: ... ethics of putting out a preprint outside our immediate area of expertise during a major public health crisis ... The papers referred to are in arxiv.org which provides drafts of scientific papers. These have been approved by a moderator, but not yet through the peer review process. The intention is to get preliminary results out quickly. Arxiv, and similar pre-print repositories, are not intended for the general public, but as they are open access anyone can read them. The problem is that the average person, or journalist, will be impressed by the scientific language and graphs, and not understand that the content had not been checked completely. I have seen at least one paper on COVID-19 which looks, on the face of it, to be of value. But this was from a team of engineers and epidemiologists. The criticism of the authors of the papers I suggest is misdirected. The fault is with the process. Criticism should be with the moderators who allowed these papers to be published, and with the process, which should require more rigor. Perhaps more than just a single moderator is needed. If any member of the scientific community really thinks a particular paper is a danger to the community, they can criticize the authors publicly, or make a complaint of unethical conduct. Anyone who has reviewed scientific papers knows the flood of dross they get: assignments from students, work which has already been published, papers off topic, stuff cobbled together from the Wikipedia, and material which is from people well meaning but don't know what they are doing. It is a routine part of the process to reject all this stuff. However, this is getting increasingly difficult, and I expect we will see more use of automated tools. -- Tom Worthington, MEd FHEA FACS CP IP3P http://www.tomw.net.au +61(0)419496150 TomW Communications Pty Ltd. PO Box 13, Belconnen ACT 2617, Australia Liability limited by a scheme approved under Prof. Standards Legislation Honorary Lecturer, Computer Science, Australian National University https://cecs.anu.edu.au/research/profile/tom-worthington ___ Link mailing list Link@mailman.anu.edu.au http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
