HACKER Q&A
📣 chimprich

Plausibility of an idea to limit the spread of Covid-19


The challenge of the current COVID-19 pandemic is well-known.

Could a voluntary user-tracking app help reduce the R0 level of the COVID-19 virus?

One of the main challenges with this virus is that carriers of the virus become infectious well before they show symptoms. Consequently, they pass on the infection before they can be isolated.

Apps such as Google Maps already track users' movements to a high level of precision. A similar app could be created that tracked users' movements and notified people they had interacted with if they got infected.

It would work like this:

  - Users' movements are tracked

  - Upon developing a fever (etc.) the user notifies the app

  - The app checks their movements during the estimated period they could have been infectious

  - Every other user who was in their presence for X minutes gets notified and requested to isolate themselves

  - Recursively check those users' movements to see if they may have passed on the virus
Disadvantages I can think of off the top of my head:

  - Requires simultaneous voluntary use by a large proportion of a regional population

  - Possibility of false positives by bad actors (would an occasional false positive be so bad)?

  - Requires some minimal altruism by the user (they won't be helped directly)

  👤 DanBC Accepted Answer ✓
Bob flies from Ireland to Cheltenham in the UK to visit the Cheltenham Gold Cup. While there he mixes with about 60,000 other visitors to the races, along with the 100,000 or so residents of Cheltenham.

Who gets traced?

https://twitter.com/carolvorders/status/1237653282761383937?...

👤 eesmith
I know of a couple who bought a clock radio connected to the emergency weather system. When a notice went out, the radio would turn on so you could hear it. They thought it would be useful, as they lived in in a tornado area, and would like a warning if they were asleep.

Problem is, it wasn't that localized. It would wake them for alerts that were 100 miles away, and which didn't affect them.

They stopped using the alarm.

In general, people won't use a service like what you describe unless it's really actionable. And I don't think this system has a high false positive rate (and high false negative rate) so there isn't good actionable information beyond what general precautions (social distancing, good hand hygiene, etc.) offer.

- What percentage of people get fevers from other reasons? That is, even without bad actors, people are going to report fevers, and those might overwhelm the actual positives.

- How close does your infection model (X minutes within distance Y) match the actual infection mechanism and rate? I suspect it isn't that good, and will include many people who aren't infected.

👤 drKarl
I think they have an app like that in China, although I think people in western countries would probably not be that willing to use it, for privacy concerns, and it would probably also violate GDPR.