2019 Novel Coronavirus Covid-19 Discussion

Forums › Health and fitness › 2019 Novel Coronavirus Covid-19 Discussion

1 | ... | 642 | 643 | 644 | 645 | 646 | 647 | 648 | 649 | 650 | 651 | 652 | ... | 2429

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2482107 12-May-2020 18:06

Handle9:

Fred99:

Restaurants aren't allowed to accept groups of 100 people - only 10.

Your PM explained the rationale for the decision. Stop whining.

Where did I say that a church would have a single group of 100 people? Stop making things up to get offended by.

A congregation is commonly referred to as a "flock". Their leader is often called a "pastor" - check the etymology. They freaking well are a group.

Stop accusing me of making things up as a BS argument to excuse morons. Please - I'll lose patience.

profrink

257 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 52

#2482111 12-May-2020 18:08

BarTender:

Pretty much this from what I understand.

The app is still being worked on but I think they are holding off before Google/Apple release their updated APIs and background bluetooth capabilities.

I just discussed exactly this with someone working on the peripheral of the response and my personal view is the whole bluetooth approach should be scrapped or available as a secondary opt-in approach.

My preference is for a purely anonymised QR code exchange between consenting parties. I enter a place of work / restaurant etc they present a custom QR code for me to scan on a tablet and then both locations know about each other. Each person then needs to scan with a new QR code. This equally would apply out and about where the phone could present a QR code for someone you didn't know or "just wanted to remember meeting with then and chatting for 10 mins".

That way it would be an explicit opt-in where you were intentionally sharing the fact that you were at the place or met with this person.

Whereas the bluetooth approach is a implicit opt-in where the assumption is it "just works in the background" when we all know there are many factors that prevent that from happening such as paired headphones playing music stops background scanning, and if you have a glucose monitor via BT for some diabetics then that stops it working too as it can't have an active BT connection for background scanning and broadcast to work from what I understand.

Sure there are all sorts of privacy, security and technology issues around it. So many I don't know where to start.

The other issue already discussed is for it to be realistically effective there needs to be a 60%+ uptake or more which I think is unrealistic in NZ... I think if we get over 40% adoption the country has done really well, but the reality is that it is still too low to be effective so can only supplement existing manual processes.

MoH are not waiting for any Android / iOS bluetooth tracing APIs, it doesn't use that.

It's a very simple QR scan system which stores your visits locally on your device. If you were to test positive, you hand over your location visit log to MoH who will push a match query out to devices. If a user has a match to covid positive location, then they will be alerted.

Privacy has been at the forefront of the thought process from what I have heard.

Dingbatt

6804 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3694

Lifetime subscriber

#2482113 12-May-2020 18:13

I was pondering the privacy aspect of a virus tracking app. Then I considered the fact that I have 7 google and amazon smart speakers in my home. I have google assistant and Bixby on my phone and Siri on my iPad. I have also welcomed Google into my life for emails, videos, web searches, navigation, etc, etc.

Plenty of people use Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, etc on their devices (not me), so it seems a bit rich to say that I won’t try and help with the current situation because of privacy concerns.

“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482115 12-May-2020 18:17

Fred99:

Handle9:

Where did I say that a church would have a single group of 100 people? Stop making things up to get offended by.

A congregation is commonly referred to as a "flock". Their leader is often called a "pastor" - check the etymology. They freaking well are a group.

Stop accusing me of making things up as a BS argument to excuse morons. Please - I'll lose patience.

You are making the assumption that all churches won't modify the way the organise and conduct their services.

If they obey the same rules as a restaurant or a bar why shouldn't they be allowed to have a service?

Ge0rge

2114 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2060

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482117 12-May-2020 18:21

Because the PM said so - seems to have worked for the last 7 weeks.

Besides, waiting an extra two weeks isn't going to kill anyone - ignoring the rules in place however...

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2482118 12-May-2020 18:28

Handle9:

If they obey the same rules as a restaurant or a bar why shouldn't they be allowed to have a service?

If they obey the rules, they can have 10 people together as a group - not 100. Same as a restaurant.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482119 12-May-2020 18:29

Ge0rge: Because the PM said so - seems to have worked for the last 7 weeks.

Besides, waiting an extra two weeks isn't going to kill anyone - ignoring the rules in place however...

It has become increasingly difficult to get compliance and poorly thought through or justified rules will become unenforceable, unless the government wants to use force/draconian fines (which I supported some time ago). Given they have't been willing to do that for most people breaking the rules it's hard to see that happening.

I'm not suggesting civil disobedience, I'm suggesting the rules aren't consistent.

They are happy for rugby clubs to get back to training (which IMO is far more dangerous than churches) but not for people to go to church.

Personally I couldn't care less. I haven't been to a church (outside of weddings and funerals) for 25 years and I'm not going anytime soon.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19071 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16319

Lifetime subscriber

#2482121 12-May-2020 18:31

Handle9:

If they obey the same rules as a restaurant or a bar why shouldn't they be allowed to have a service?

I think the PM actually addressed that issue, though maybe not in so many words. Churchgoers of a more Pentecostal persuasion may be inclined to sing and dance and embrace fellow worshippers in an ecstasy of joyous belief. Diners have a more agnostic tendency to remain seated and eat in peace.

I think the issue is that restaurant congregations are more easily controlled. I believe the same logic is being applied to funerals.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

frankv

5705 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3666

Lifetime subscriber

#2482123 12-May-2020 18:35

Fred99: Please - I'll lose patience.

Losin' ma religion...

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482124 12-May-2020 18:36

Rikkitic:

Handle9:

If they obey the same rules as a restaurant or a bar why shouldn't they be allowed to have a service?

I think the PM actually addressed that issue, though maybe not in so many words. Churchgoers of a more Pentecostal persuasion may be inclined to sing and dance and embrace fellow worshippers in an ecstasy of joyous belief. Diners have a more agnostic tendency to remain seated and eat in peace.

I think the issue is that restaurant congregations are more easily controlled. I believe the same logic is being applied to funerals.

The assumption is that drunk people are better behaved than people going to church? It doesn't seem sensible.

And men are allowed to grapple, grab and tackle each other in groups of 16 (professional rugby training)

Time for me to stop but it's apparent why religous people would be unhappy about this.

neb

11294 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482141 12-May-2020 18:41

Handle9:
And men are allowed to grapple, grab and tackle each other in groups of 16 (professional rugby training)

Isn't that the advertising pitch, "Play rugby and feel a man"?

(OK, I'll see myself out...).

Dyson

Shop now for Dyson appliances (affiliate link).

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#2482143 12-May-2020 18:47

Handle9:

Time for me to stop but it's apparent why a few ~~religous~~ opportunists who depend on presence of a flock to fleece would be unhappy about this.

FTFY. Hope you understand why they shouldn't be granted special exemptions just because they claim to believe in some invisible men in the sky.

SepticSceptic

2263 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 779

Trusted

#2482144 12-May-2020 18:53

Dingbatt:
I was pondering the privacy aspect of a virus tracking app. Then I considered the fact that I have 7 google and amazon smart speakers in my home. I have google assistant and Bixby on my phone and Siri on my iPad. I have also welcomed Google into my life for emails, videos, web searches, navigation, etc, etc.

Plenty of people use Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat, etc on their devices (not me), so it seems a bit rich to say that I won’t try and help with the current situation because of privacy concerns.

There was a news article last night about a young lady being harassed / stalked via social media and txts from contact tracing details she had given at a Subway outlet.

Really unconscionable actions on the staff member concerned and could well put off any one else from accepting contact tracing details being made anywhere near public.
Even writing them down on a list on a public counter could eventuate someone else in line lifting contact details.

Handle9

11927 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9683

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2482147 12-May-2020 18:56

Fred99:

Handle9:

Time for me to stop but it's apparent why a few religous opportunists who depend on presence of a flock to fleece would be unhappy about this.

FTFY. Hope you understand why they shouldn't be granted special exemptions just because they claim to believe in some invisible men in the sky.

Wow. IMO you're breaking Wheatons Law here by labelling anyone who is religious as the same as Brian Tamaki.

Hammerer

2480 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 802

Lifetime subscriber

#2482148 12-May-2020 18:57

Fred99:

Handle9:

Where did I say that a church would have a single group of 100 people? Stop making things up to get offended by.

A congregation is commonly referred to as a "flock". Their leader is often called a "pastor" - check the etymology. They freaking well are a group.

Stop accusing me of making things up as a BS argument to excuse morons. Please - I'll lose patience.

That looks like you missed the point about which group size is used.

All the people at a restaurant form a group just like all the people in a church building. Very often I go to a restaurant and know people in other groups eating there but that doesn't mean that I have to associate with them all while at the restaurant.

It works much the same way among people in churches. Most people have a small group of close associates that they would meet together with. Personally, my group would be about 12 so it would be very easy to drop that to 10 as some people will not be coming until Level 1.

The argument I heard Jacinda Adren use against allowing churches to meet together like restaurants is that "fellowship" essentially means everybody meets with everyone else. That is true in a spiritual sense. But that is not the practical reality for most of us. Fellowship primarily occurs between individuals or in small groups rather than fellowship that requires contact between all people at all meetings. Even in a church of 100 people it would be unusual for most people to meet every person at each meeting.

I think that it would be no hardship to socially isolate in churches just like at restaurants. But as it happens it will be no hardship to meet in small groups in homes.

1 | ... | 642 | 643 | 644 | 645 | 646 | 647 | 648 | 649 | 650 | 651 | 652 | ... | 2429