In my opinion - these types of data are poor proxies for the ground truth we really seek: actual #COVID19 infection rates -- which can only be truly known by widespread testing. If we had testing in place, it would make the need to pursue these privacy-invasive techniques moot
While I suspect these tools will be framed as & #39;voluntary / opt-in& #39; -- they will eventually become compulsory once policymakers begin to rely on them in order to decide, for example, who can leave the house or who can return to work -- setting an incredibly dangerous precedent.
This type of approach is likely to generate significant FALSE POSITIVES and FALSE NEGATIVES -- which is highly problematic when this data is (eventually) used to make decisions that will affect citizen& #39;s freedoms -- voluntarily or not.
Bluetooth signals traverse walls, linking you to your neighbor even if you& #39;ve never actually been in actual physical contact (for example, in an apartment building).
Similarly, we don& #39;t necessarily carry our smartphones all the time -- for example when meeting a delivery person in front of their house, etc -- and many individuals (i.e children and the elderly) don& #39;t have smartphones.

This will lead to SIGNIFICANT false negatives.
MOST IMPORTANTLY there& #39;s a REAL risk of abuse from these apps -- generating false alarms and Denial-of-Service attacks from people falsely flagging that they& #39;re infected with COVID19 (crying & #39;wolf) -- thereby potentially affecting the others they& #39;ve digitally been in contact with
You can follow @ashk4n.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: