Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

mugtang

Kushner wants authoritarian surveillance program for Covid-19

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, BSUTOP25 said:

Surveillance state is surveillance state. Shall we ankle bracelet everyone with HIV as well? Make them wear an armband at all times? Hmm, where have we seen that sort of thing before?

3116_50.JPG

I’m pretty sure, but Joe would know better, that people have already been subject to legal action for knowingly subjecting others to HIV.   Which is one alternative to a tracking app.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

I’m pretty sure, but Joe would know better, that people have already been subject to legal action for knowingly subjecting others to HIV.   Which is one alternative to a tracking app.  

I'd rather die of AIDS (or Ebola or whatever other horrible illness one can think of) than live in a surveillance state like the one you and your ilk champion.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

I’m pretty sure, but Joe would know better, that people have already been subject to legal action for knowingly subjecting others to HIV.   Which is one alternative to a tracking app.  

Knowingly infecting someone without disclosing their disease is not the same thing as forcing a big +++++ing scarlet letter on an HIV carrier. JFC

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

I simply believe that anyone who believes we need surveillance and tracking like South Korea should move the +++++ to South Korea because I’m going to resist that type of shit here.

Happy to have that discussion around tracking and alternatives.  Quite frankly, I suspect most would support it voluntarily but sure let’s discuss where they don’t.   Would rather have that substantial discussion than this Krushner red herring.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

Happy to have that discussion around tracking and alternatives.  Quite frankly, I suspect most would support it voluntarily but sure let’s discuss where they don’t.   Would rather have that substantial discussion than this Krushner red herring.  

If people want to willingly volunteer or knowingly consent to that shit, that’s their own business. Have at it. I’m talking about compulsory tracking and monitoring. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

Knowingly infecting someone without disclosing their disease is not the same thing as forcing a big +++++ing scarlet letter on an HIV carrier. JFC

The scarlet letter Hitler analogy was your own.  Knowingly infecting someone with aides or knowingly infecting someone with Corona virus is another.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sactowndog said:

The scarlet letter Hitler analogy was your own.  Knowingly infecting someone with aides or knowingly infecting someone with Corona virus is another.   

So if you negligently or knowingly (within the meaning of those terms in criminal statutes) infect someone with the flu, is that analogous to infecting someone with AIDS, and should it be treated the same way? If so, we're going to need a lot more prison beds. 

The real Red Herring here is you trying to compare the Chinese Virus to AIDS. Yeah. Great comparison dumbass. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BSUTOP25 said:

If people want to willingly volunteer or knowingly consent to that shit, that’s their own business. Have at it. I’m talking about compulsory tracking and monitoring. 

Fine so let’s talk about it.   First Joe want to comment on the legal precedent set in terms of aides and other instances of knowingly infecting a person with a potentially fatal disease?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sactowndog said:

The scarlet letter Hitler analogy was your own.  Knowingly infecting someone with aides or knowingly infecting someone with Corona virus is another.   

First, it’s AIDS.

Second, state mandated tracking and monitoring of movement combined with identifiers of a trait, illness or whatever, is mother+++++ing authoritarian as hell. 

+++++ that.

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Too tired to scroll through the whole thread 

Just because I want pizza doesn't mean I want Jared kushner to be the one making it.

The time to track was 2 months ago. Using testing and social network analysis; actual boots on the ground questions about who you've been with and what you have done. We don't need total patient history to create a social network analysis. We need people to do homework and figure out who you've been having contact with -- not who you are related to.

Now it's too late for tracking to be useful. 

Were it someone else other than Jared kushner, someone at the CDC, or a federal oversight committee that got state buy in, and 2 months ago, I'd say yes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sactowndog said:

Fine so let’s talk about it.   First Joe want to comment on the legal precedent set in terms of aides and other instances of knowingly infecting a person with a potentially fatal disease?  

Nobody with an illness should be subjected to 24/7 surveillance. Period.

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Joe from WY said:

So if you negligently or knowingly (within the meaning of those terms in criminal statutes) infect someone with the flu, is that analogous to infecting someone with AIDS, and should it be treated the same way? If so, we're going to need a lot more prison beds. 

The real Red Herring here is you trying to compare the Chinese Virus to AIDS. Yeah. Great comparison dumbass. 

Obviously they aren’t totally analogous but if you violated the orders to stay at home I’m pretty sure a person could sue with a reasonable expectation of success.  A more interesting legal question is if you didn’t volunteer your trace method and it could be shown you infected others and made no attempt to reasonably inform them what their legal liability might be?

All of this legal speculation is predicated on the governments right to expose you as a carrier if you refused to cooperate.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway, I’m going to bed. But this thread is exactly why I don’t refer to leftists as “liberals.” Real liberals do not believe in or support police surveillance states. 

bsu_retro_bsu_logo_helmet.b_1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BSUTOP25 said:

Nobody with an illness should be subjected to 24/7 surveillance. Period.

I potentially agree.   But no one should be knowingly exposed due to another persons indifference.  Care to explain how you balance those points? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NVGiant said:

 

Really there are only two questions. 

  • How many deaths are you willing to live with? (and if you are willing to live with a lot, then make sure you factor in that the odds increase that your parents or grandparents, friends, wife, etc., die, too)

AT LEAST 60K

https://www.health.com/condition/cold-flu-sinus/how-many-people-die-of-the-flu-every-year

  • What rights are you willing to give up? (and if you are willing to suspend them, factor in just how hard it could be to get them back).

NONE

 

I dont need the government to tell me to keep the kids away from Nana and Grandpa during flu season. If other ppl cant figure that out on their wn there isnt much hope for them period #DarwinAwards

The rest of us non susceptible ppl should be living our daily lives, building up antibodies. 

Nobody is telling you that you cant SQ. Stop telling other ppl what to do

 

ezgif-5-959914ff2250.gif.f0cc4fc558f5a154dc6ff5904c80bf34.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CPslograd said:

Mug, you are inconsistent on this.

How so?

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sactowndog said:

Very good article.  
 

1) note that no where in there does it talk about a comprehensive health database like the one proposed by Trump

2) the cell phone tracking isn’t really that different I would guess given the extent apps on our phones use location data.   I think someone has already posted tracking data from Google.  

3)  the real difference is in being forced to install a tracking app on your phone.   It’s an interesting concept and I worry about what else it might track.  It also raises an interesting civil liberties question between your right to privacy and someone else’s right for you to not knowingly expose them to a disease.   I suspect a greater risk than the tracking apps would be the lawsuits or penal action you might face for reckless endangerment.  

You don't get it.

Of course they have a national database, how the hell else are they texting people on their phone that they have to self isolate because went to the same store as someone who was on the same train as someone who tested positive.  And that's the reason to oppose this thing they have been talking about doing.  Obviously the real reason for the database isn't to know where to send extra ventilators to.  Gimme a break.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FresnoFacts said:

You handle it well mysfit. My wife has a lot of brothers (no sister) and had to learn to hold her own also.

My last engineering job, during the interview the director was concerned about me being the only woman in the group and if I could handle it 

A few  months in he came to the conclusion he was worried about the wrong gender. I miss that group. We had fun.

One of the Final Five..........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, mysfit said:

My last engineering job, during the interview the director was concerned about me being the only woman in the group and if I could handle it 

A few  months in he came to the conclusion he was worried about the wrong gender. I miss that group. We had fun.

This is going to sound strange, but when I worked in a male dominated profession it was really difficult working with women. But, on the flip side, now that I work in a female dominated profession they are a breeze to work with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe this isn't just about Kushner.

Kushner put together a team of people he knows as a coronavirus task force.

One he brought in is Nat Turner, founder of the technology company Flatiron Health.

On Flatiron's blog Turner says, "Inspired by personal experiences with cancer in our families, we always believed that cancer wouldn’t be “solved” by the healthcare community alone; it also needed close collaboration from the technology industry working together hand in hand."

https://flatiron.com/blog/roche/

Moving from a few million cancer patient records as they currently have to having access to everything about everyone's health would be huge. Think Facebook or Google for healthcare data with the government helping them get started.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...