England & Wales Tracing App to be released Sept 24th

[Huntergreed]

I can't speak for @island but for me personally if that happened to me then I'd reduce my contact with other people to zero. Right now, for instance, I go to the supermarket once a week, a takeaway around once a week and the office several times a week and an outdoor walk several times per week. If I got a notification like that I'd cut out all of the above apart from the walk (which is outdoors and it's easy to be more than even 2m away so the chance of transmission is as close to zero as it's possibel to be). My judgement would be that stopping all of those activities other than walk is a perfectly sensible and appropriate response to being notified that I might have Covid-19. Banning leaving my home to even take outdoor exercise is madness. I appreciate the policing difficulties and why, therefore, the rules have ended up the way they are but that doesn't change my view that as an individual I would be abiding by the spirit of self-isolation if not the letter by acting in the above way.

I agree, that seems reasonable as outdoor transmission risk is negligible.

Can someone confirm, if following the law to the letter, does it mean it's illegal to go out purely if the app tells you not to?

 

[43066]

This is why I favour hotel quarantine - it can actually be controlled to prevent selfish people deciding they are more important than others. If you don't like it, take steps to reduce your risk, such as complying religiously to 2m distancing (T&T aren't themselves interested beyond that, though there's some evidence that the app does look up to 4m if you're there for a long time) and not taking a foreign holiday at present.

So you’re saying you’re in favour of internment of innocent members of the population, “just in case” (for “hotel”, read “prison camp”). What a vision of the future!

I have to say personally I’d rather we suffer hundreds of thousands of deaths from the virus than turn this country into the kind of state you seem to wish to live in.

The more I read views like this (and I realise you’re by no means alone) the more I’m determined to do whatever I can to confound these ridiculous restrictions, and I hope others take a similar approach.

As much as I find it frustrating that people won't simply take this seriously.

It's not really about authoritarianism, it's about the Asian cultures[1] where you think of others before yourself (or call it the Scout Law) which I do see as superior to Western (worse in the US to be fair) "selfish" cultures. There would be no need for any of these laws if people just did the right thing.

[1] The Asian democracies, not China.

It seems to me that the more selfish approach is expecting the lives of millions to be severely curtailed (and in many cases ruined), just to buy a few extra weeks for people who are in many cases at the end of their natural lives, living in care homes etc.

 

[py_megapixel]

Now that how the app works is more publicly available, and they seem to have made an effort not to have it upload personal data to a centralised cloud (instead, it is stored on the device unless you test positive, at which point you are given the option to upload anonymised data to assist with T+T)

I'm now feeling a little more inclined to download it. I'll still wait and see if it's giving people spurious "you must isolate" notifications, and if at any point it asks for GPS permissions or for permission to upload personal data then I will be removing it. However, I'm glad to see Google and Apple forcing at least a grain of competence out of this pathetic government.

 

[Mojo]

I think I said this in the original thread last time this came around, but I shan’t be installing the App as I always leave Bluetooth turned off on my phone except the handful of times per year that I need it on.

Is there any point installing this App with Bluetooth turned off, I assume venues will still be keeping either the trck.to QR codes or other track/trace formats that don’t go through this App? As an aside, not yet seen any venues in real life that have this NHS code on display yet.

 

[py_megapixel]

Is there any point installing this App with Bluetooth turned off, I assume venues will still be keeping either the trck.to QR codes or other track/trace formats that don’t go through this App?

Sends you notifications if the area you live in is classified as "high risk". Though possibly useful for some people, that's information you should be able to Google for instead.

 

[Wuffle]

The app uses bluetooth proximity and much like cloth face masks is pretty much useless for the intended purpose

 

[Bletchleyite]

It won't run with Bluetooth off, if I recall.

 

[py_megapixel]

It won't run with Bluetooth off, if I recall.

Surely that's just a bug, given that it provides functionality which does not require Bluetooth? Or possibly a developer reading about the permissions framework and becoming slightly overexcited to implement it, despite it not being necessary?

 

[Trackman]

It won't run with Bluetooth off, if I recall.

It does but contact tracing will not work, in fact you can turn it off in the app. It also switches off wifi for the app .

edit: photo click for bigger

 

[takno]

Surely that's just a bug, given that it provides functionality which does not require Bluetooth? Or possibly a developer reading about the permissions framework and becoming slightly overexcited to implement it, despite it not being necessary?

It doesn't seem to provide enough functionality to be worth it with Bluetooth off. If you provide the option then half the people who install it will fail to get the Bluetooth working, and most of the benefit will be gone.

 

[py_megapixel]

It doesn't seem to provide enough functionality to be worth it with Bluetooth off. If you provide the option then half the people who install it will fail to get the Bluetooth working, and most of the benefit will be gone.

Turning Bluetooth on is trivial. It's a swipe down from the top of the screen and a single button press. Plus an app can turn it on automatically.

 

[takno]

Turning Bluetooth on is trivial. It's a swipe down from the top of the screen and a single button press. Plus an app can turn it on automatically.

Yes, but it's the confusion element. Fundamentally you don't want people installing the app then leaving Bluetooth off and feeling like they've done something good. Without Bluetooth the app is about as useful as changing your wallpaper to a support-the-NHS rainbow.

 

[Mag_seven]

We seem to be forgetting the "test" element of this. If after having received a notification you were entitled to get a test which could reduce the self isolation period then I think more people would install it.

 

[Bletchleyite]

We seem to be forgetting the "test" element of this. If after having received a notification you were entitled to get a test which could reduce the self isolation period then I think more people would install it.

Yes, I think sorting out the testing system and moving to this is key - for any isolation period other than a positive test, you should be able to get a test and be "released" on day 5, say, if negative. If positive obviously the 10 day period starts.

 

[Huntergreed]

Yes, I think sorting out the testing system and moving to this is key - for any isolation period other than a positive test, you should be able to get a test and be "released" on day 5, say, if negative. If positive obviously the 10 day period starts.

Absolutely, and I think this would hugely increase compliance.

 

[Bantamzen]

It won't run with Bluetooth off, if I recall.

It does but contact tracing will not work, in fact you can turn it off in the app. It also switches off wifi for the app .

edit: photo click for bigger
View attachment 83920

I've just tried it now and it does work when you switch Bluetooth Tracking off (Android version).

 

[WelshBluebird]

We seem to be forgetting the "test" element of this. If after having received a notification you were entitled to get a test which could reduce the self isolation period then I think more people would install it.

To be fair given how hard it is to get a test atm, I think the government and Serco have forgotten about the test element too!
Right now if you try to go to the website for a test you get the following message: "There are no tests available right now - We are experiencing very high demand for testing at the moment. Please try again tomorrow". Not exactly inspiring confidence.

 

[yorkie]

I can't speak for @island but for me personally if that happened to me then I'd reduce my contact with other people to zero. Right now, for instance, I go to the supermarket once a week, a takeaway around once a week and the office several times a week and an outdoor walk several times per week. If I got a notification like that I'd cut out all of the above apart from the walk (which is outdoors and it's easy to be more than even 2m away so the chance of transmission is as close to zero as it's possibel to be). My judgement would be that stopping all of those activities other than walk is a perfectly sensible and appropriate response to being notified that I might have Covid-19. Banning leaving my home to even take outdoor exercise is madness. I appreciate the policing difficulties and why, therefore, the rules have ended up the way they are but that doesn't change my view that as an individual I would be abiding by the spirit of self-isolation if not the letter by acting in the above way.

I completely agree!

 

[bengley]

Well, I tried to go into a bar in Manchester which I go to most times I go into town for a few drinks. The bloke on the door waved an NHS QR code at me and told me to download the app and scan it. I asked him if this was mandatory. He said "We'd like you to do it". When I said no, and asked to fill in a paper form he said they don't have paper forms anymore and the only way is to use the NHS app.

I went elsewhere.

 

[Huntergreed]

Well, I tried to go into a bar in Manchester which I go to most times I go into town for a few drinks. The bloke on the door waved an NHS QR code at me and told me to download the app and scan it. I asked him if this was mandatory. He said "We'd like you to do it". When I said no, and asked to fill in a paper form he said they don't have paper forms anymore and the only way is to use the NHS app.

I went elsewhere.

You could just download the app, scan it, then delete it again

 

[bengley]

You could just download the app, scan it, then delete it again

I suppose I could have done. I went elsewhere on principal though. The people in front of my group also walked away so they've lost a total of 5 peoples' business in 2 minutes

 

[island]

I can't speak for @island but for me personally if that happened to me then I'd reduce my contact with other people to zero. Right now, for instance, I go to the supermarket once a week, a takeaway around once a week and the office several times a week and an outdoor walk several times per week. If I got a notification like that I'd cut out all of the above apart from the walk (which is outdoors and it's easy to be more than even 2m away so the chance of transmission is as close to zero as it's possibel to be). My judgement would be that stopping all of those activities other than walk is a perfectly sensible and appropriate response to being notified that I might have Covid-19. Banning leaving my home to even take outdoor exercise is madness. I appreciate the policing difficulties and why, therefore, the rules have ended up the way they are but that doesn't change my view that as an individual I would be abiding by the spirit of self-isolation if not the letter by acting in the above way.

Actually you are more than welcome to speak for me because that is all but identical to my current situation and view.

I agree, that seems reasonable as outdoor transmission risk is negligible.

Can someone confirm, if following the law to the letter, does it mean it's illegal to go out purely if the app tells you not to?

There is currently no law requiring people to self-isolate if contacted (via app or otherwise) with a suspicion they may have COVID19. Such a law has been mooted but I have not seen the legal text as of yet.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Sep 2020 ==

Well, I tried to go into a bar in Manchester which I go to most times I go into town for a few drinks. The bloke on the door waved an NHS QR code at me and told me to download the app and scan it. I asked him if this was mandatory. He said "We'd like you to do it". When I said no, and asked to fill in a paper form he said they don't have paper forms anymore and the only way is to use the NHS app.

I went elsewhere.

The law does not require you to use the app. You remain entitled to give your contact details another way, such as on paper.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The law does not require you to use the app. You remain entitled to give your contact details another way, such as on paper.

However a business can make that policy if they wish. There will be some places which don't think it worth the small amount of business that will object, particularly bars aimed at young people in cities.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Amongst the places I visit, the trend I am seeing is that the ones that used their own QR code / website system beforehand are now using the NHS track and trace app QR codes and the places that just took names and contact details manually are now using the NHS app too but still allowing the manual way for other people too.

As Bletchleyite has put - its up to the business and if they feel they don't want to effort of keeping a system themselves when they could us the NHS app then that is up to them. What their usual market is like will determine if that a good or bad business decision. Certainly for some places I visit, it will be fine as they are the kind of places that were card only etc even before COVID.

 

[py_megapixel]

However a business can make that policy if they wish.

Indeed - when people say they are "entitled" to an alternative to following a procedure set by a private business on their own premises then, as long as that policy does not discriminate against a protected characteristic, an acceptable alternative is not using that business.

If Asda suddenly said you had to prebook a day in advance to go shopping, people would be angry - but there's nothing they can do, as they have no right to go to Asda!

 

[The_Train]

It's all a percentages game. You don't need everyone to respond to any single measure, just enough to slow the spread. On the app specifically, I think far more than a third will self-isolate even if they don't keep slavishly to rules about walking around empty streets Even people who ignore the self isolation calls though are still adding value as part of the network, because if they themselves are infected they may well upload that to the app and warn others

My example of a third of people was purely to clearly show the point I was trying to make. I have no idea how many people will download it and how many of these will use it as it is meant to be used.

The point you made which I have highlighted in bold is a great one though. That side of it is something I had not considered and will indeed play a part in warning people that they have been in the vicinity of someone who may have the virus or has come into contact with someone else who has the virus.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 25 Sep 2020 ==

I can't speak for @island but for me personally if that happened to me then I'd reduce my contact with other people to zero. Right now, for instance, I go to the supermarket once a week, a takeaway around once a week and the office several times a week and an outdoor walk several times per week. If I got a notification like that I'd cut out all of the above apart from the walk (which is outdoors and it's easy to be more than even 2m away so the chance of transmission is as close to zero as it's possibel to be). My judgement would be that stopping all of those activities other than walk is a perfectly sensible and appropriate response to being notified that I might have Covid-19. Banning leaving my home to even take outdoor exercise is madness. I appreciate the policing difficulties and why, therefore, the rules have ended up the way they are but that doesn't change my view that as an individual I would be abiding by the spirit of self-isolation if not the letter by acting in the above way.

I think that you would absolutely be abiding by the spirit of self-isolation by doing as you say you would. I also think that the vast majority of people would do the same thing and it probably shows that a good chunk of us are able to decide what is best for ourselves whilst also considering others - something the Government clearly don't believe to be the case.

That said, as much as I don't agree with the rules around self-isolation, it still makes me wonder why people would download the app only to then not abide by the full guidelines set out by our 'leaders' - not agreeing with them is not really a great reason in my opinion, particularly as it's optional to download the app in the first place.

Might just be my attitude of only getting involved in something which I can buy into and commit to 100% and anything else isn't really worth the effort that is making me think along these lines

 

[talltim]

The thing that stops me is the fact that Bluetooth kills my phone's battery.

Me too. I always have it off except the occasional time I am explicitly using it. I turn my wireless off when I go out a lot of the time for the same reason

 

[WelshBluebird]

That said, as much as I don't agree with the rules around self-isolation, it still makes me wonder why people would download the app only to then not abide by the full guidelines set out by our 'leaders' - not agreeing with them is not really a great reason in my opinion, particularly as it's optional to download the app in the first place.

Work is probably a big reason.
For some of us who can work from home or who actually work for decent companies, 2 weeks at home isn't that bad.
But if you can't work from home and your employer just relies on SSP - it can be brutal getting your wage slashed for those two weeks.

As an example - my partner works for a large pub chain who we shall not mention the name of. If she has to self isolate, she'll end up with only about half of the pay she would otherwise get. We are lucky that I have been working from home so I'll still be able to continue working in that situation, which will more than pay the bills, but you can imagine if both of us were in similar position of losing money, how one or both of us may not listen to the advice, even if we agree with it and want to follow it.

I know they have added in a small payment for if you do have to self isolate, but you are only eligible for that if you are already in receipt of UC I believe, so it doesn't go far enough at all.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Done my first check-in today!

I also did something else that someone else suggested to reduce the risk of an incorrect contact trace due to someone who came in hours later. Get a poster for your home address, and scan that when you leave the venue and head home.

I'm also told that (due to a bug in the app) rescanning the code for the place you are in and pressing "cancel checkout" also works to end a checkin.

 

[Trackman]

Done my first check-in today!

I also did something else that someone else suggested to reduce the risk of an incorrect contact trace due to someone who came in hours later. Get a poster for your home address, and scan that when you leave the venue and head home.

Is this it?

COVID-19: guidance and support

Find information on COVID-19, including guidance and support.

www.gov.uk