Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack91
If you have the app, and come into contact with someone who has the virus, if the app knows that the person is infected, then it stands to reason that the infected person is knowingly out and about breaking the rules, yet has downloaded the app to "save lives".....?
If it doesnt work like that, instead, alerting anyone ive been near that they are at risk if i test positive a fortnight later, then the damage is already done? Yeah, ill take 2 weeks off work because i walked past some guy in the supermarket. Righttttttt. Good luck with that.
I just cant understand how it could make any difference. All it seems to be is an expensive, kneejerk reaction, like most government initiatives.
Really glad to hear it debated on radio shows etc. Its funny that the supporters only argument is " because we said so"
|
Gee a lot of strawman arguments there, I couldn't resist a reply, plus I can't sleep.
The application of the app is in its simplicity.
If you get the virus then the health authorities will be able to get in touch with people who have been in contact with you as indicated via bluetooth.
Alternatively, the health authorities will contact you if the app shows you came into contact with an infected person.
The health authorities will then tell you what to do next.
To answer your other concerns:
It is cheap.
It is not a kneejerk reaction, but yours is.
In some people their symptoms are asymptomatic, the app will tell them they have been in contact with someone who has the virus.
It's not only about flattening the curve, but getting ahead of it.
Don't be a silly boy and download the app. The life you save might be your own.