Tech Coalition Working To Create Digital COVID-19 Vaccination Passport (thehill.com) 190
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Hill: A coalition of health and technology organizations are working to develop a digital COVID-19 vaccination passport to allow businesses, airlines and countries to check if people have received the vaccine. The Vaccination Credential Initiative, announced on Thursday, is formulating technology to confirm vaccinations in the likelihood that some governments will mandate people provide proof of their shots in order to enter the nation. The organization hopes the technology will allow people to "demonstrate their health status to safely return to travel, work, school and life while protecting their data privacy."
The initiative, which includes members like Microsoft, Oracle and U.S. nonprofit Mayo Clinic, is using the work from member Commons Project's international digital document that verifies a person has tested negative for COVID-19, the Financial Times reported. The Commons Project's technology, created in partnership with the Rockefeller Foundation, is being utilized by three major airline alliances. The coalition is reportedly in discussions with several governments to create a program requiring either negative tests or proof of vaccination to enter, Paul Meyer, the chief executive of The Commons Project, told the Times. The technology will need to allow patients to keep their data secure while being available in a digital wallet or a physical QR code for them to regulate who sees the information.
The initiative, which includes members like Microsoft, Oracle and U.S. nonprofit Mayo Clinic, is using the work from member Commons Project's international digital document that verifies a person has tested negative for COVID-19, the Financial Times reported. The Commons Project's technology, created in partnership with the Rockefeller Foundation, is being utilized by three major airline alliances. The coalition is reportedly in discussions with several governments to create a program requiring either negative tests or proof of vaccination to enter, Paul Meyer, the chief executive of The Commons Project, told the Times. The technology will need to allow patients to keep their data secure while being available in a digital wallet or a physical QR code for them to regulate who sees the information.
As usual (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: As usual (Score:5, Insightful)
> *has smartphone in pocket*
> *complains about possibility of inferior ways of tracking*
--.--
Look up "baseband processor". Then "XKeyScore".
No need to say more... anymore.
Re: (Score:3)
Just today an interesting paper was published about this: https://www.schneier.com/blog/... [schneier.com]
When you go abroad if you use a disposable local SIM card you can be pretty anonymous, smartphone wise. Yeah yeah the NSA and GCHQ have p0wned your baseband processor, but realistically unless you a very high value target to them they aren't going to waste those exploits on you.
Re:As usual (Score:5, Funny)
We can name the app: "Papers, Please"....
Re: (Score:2)
Back in the old days, where you went to you community general store to buy goods. You knew everyone there and everyone knew you. One would go and pick up some cream for a rash, then the next day, everyone assumes you have an STD and your Girl Friend is now labeled a whore.
Compare that today, where you may Google anti-rash cream, and buy it online. You may have some ads for a few weeks for such cream, however, the community isn't judging you on your purchase.
While tracking technology is advanced, the iss
Re: As usual (Score:5, Interesting)
1) Technologically, it is simpler to just track everyone. Why add an exception for somebody? The GCHQ and NSA were the first to aquire the computing power to do that, and bragged about it in the Snowden leaks.
2) Of course they are judging you! What do you think Trump got banned for? What do you think "moderation" or "votes" (like on social media) and social credic scores or other credit scores are all about? What you are paying for healthcare, car insurance, loans etc, and if people will befriend you, is increasingly based on big data.
3) In the community store, the amount of people was limited, and the views always shifted with the latest information, while everything could be forgotten and forgiven. And tgere was more context available too.
On the Internet, there's about 5000 people with the will and means to kill you for it, literally no matter what it is you said or did. And it will still be visible to them in decades. (E.g. for you and me that would probably people believing in Shariah law. Or those who stormed the Capitol. Or racists from other countries. Gotta meet just one of them in a back alley on a holiday trip.)
This is what the GDPR is all about.
Why are you parroting such typical extremely clueless talking points? We've been over this, years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Hi, this problem got solved pre-2010 with the ACA,also known as Obamacare. Other than age, gender and location, the only price discrimination allowed in the health insurance marketplace is tobacco use.
Loans are the first example of big data, and it's use hasn't really grown.
This is backwards. Car insurance is increasingly being based on
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I am sure it will be 100% anonymous and privacy-preserving and it won't be used to track people, right?
Exactly. I hate the fact that we've seemingly thrown HIPAA out the fucking window over this.
People need to understand that this will be demonized by your insurance company to their advantage for years if not decades to come.
I would not be surprised to find 10 years from now on "random" medical questionaires that are mandatory when you visit your doctors office asking if you've had COVID before, just so they can charge you more.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course medical insurance companies are interested in if you are up to date with your vaccinations. This isn't new, if you haven't had your MMR and other childhood stuff it will affect your premiums.
Re: (Score:2)
Not in the US (post-ACA). Although it should.
Re: (Score:2)
In the US, the ACA (aka Obamacare) says that the only criteria they can use to charge you more is age or gender (not under your control) and geographic location or tobacco use (which are). You're so concerned about something bad happening that you're ignoring we a;ready dealt with preexisting conditions.
Re: (Score:2)
Irony aside, the presence of Apple could be a deciding factor for me : they present themselves as fighting for privacy, hence they would have a lot to lose. If they back an initiative (such as the Covid-19 exposure API), then it probably means that they have checked its privacy implications.
It is not that I trust Apple more than Google or Facebook : I trust Apple for serving its own interests, which currently incl
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
"Apple banned the Parler app. I would not trust Apple with anything at this point."
From the descriptions of how they secured Parler, regardless of the violence related rhetoric, it sounds as if Apple did its users a favour.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"Apple banned the Parler app. I would not trust Apple with anything at this point."
From the descriptions of how they secured Parler, regardless of the violence related rhetoric, it sounds as if Apple did its users a favour.
If Apple banned Parler because it was insecure garbage, I would be with you. However, they banned Parler for different reasons and then it came out that they were insecure garbage.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair the Google/Apple contact tracing system appears to be both privacy preserving and impossible to use for tracking, so there is a chance this will be too.
Before someone says "Singapore" they are giving their own local contact tracing system data to the police. The Google/Apple one is anonymous and provides no useful data to them.
Re: (Score:2)
"Duck Duck Go is still pretty bad, but it's slightly better than the Google results, which are downright communist."
Doesn't Duck duck Go just query Google for you?
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't Duck duck Go just query Google for you?
No. Not exactly a discrete search database, either, but something a bit more like Metacrawler or Dogpile (though they do operate their own crawlers, and accumulate some of their own data). I don't believe they use Google's services at all, as least not based on everything I've read to date. Also, the "!g" token in search just initiates a redirect to google.
Re: (Score:2)
A passport is typically used to cross a border. That's what it is for.
Now, we're told that we're going to have new borders:
- at the cinema
- at the restaurant
-
Where does this stop? Do they add a checkpoint for food stores? Do I need a passport to go to the bakery and buy fresh bread? Will there be armed police to enforce this?
This is worse than any scifi book or movie... I'm sick not of covid, but thinking about all of this.
Re: As usual (Score:4, Insightful)
Tracking has never been "controversial".
That's a term that manipulative people use when presenting xompletely unacceptable views as "alternatives" to appear "neutral" while shifting the discussion.
Tracking is always a totalitarian crime of totalitarian rogue states. Sure, you can do it, But then you'll be in the N@zi Germany category.
And repeating it often enough in a casual way, doesn't change that.
Re: (Score:2)
N@zi Germany wasn't big on tracking. They didn't need to be, they just rounded up undesirables. Maybe you are thinking of the Stasi, which came later.
In any case it's too late for us, now everyone carries a mobile phone tracking is widespread and continual, has been for a couple of decades. We haven't fallen down the slippery slope yet. It must be more complicated than you suggest.
Re: (Score:2)
So it's like Republicans treating everyone who wants to get on a plane as a criminal with scans and pat downs and proctology exams. You know, because it was only a one time event which only killed 3,000 people.
Unlike covid which killed 4,000 people yesterday alone.
Can I have a yellow star instead? (Score:3, Insightful)
Sounds like less of a hassle. ;)
Re: Can I have a yellow star instead? (Score:2)
Re: Can I have a yellow star instead? (Score:2)
I honestly don't know which Idiocracy joke to choose here... You you say, I'm Not Sure.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
So how do you feel about children whose parents refuse vaccination being excluded from school, in order to protect the other kids?
The bigger issues here are the potential to create a divide between those who are vaccinated and those who are still waiting to be, and that people are being given a false sense of security when in fact being vaccinated is not guaranteed protection or safety.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The vaccines are never 100% effective.
Also many schools have a range of ages, and some vaccines can't be given to the younger ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
This is pointless (Score:4, Interesting)
Being vaccinated confers pretty much the same immunity as having been infected, it is not 100% but it comes reasonably close. The way this is being presented here, only people who have been vaccinated will qualify and that is just idiotic in this context.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Being vaccinated confers pretty much the same immunity as having been infected
I thought the reports said that the vaccine should provide significantly *greater* immunity?
Re: This is pointless (Score:2)
Agreed, people who had Covid ams are healthy again should get the same "passport", if we ever do that at all.
Re: (Score:2)
It's even more complicated than that.
Getting COVID gives you some immunity for a few months, possibly a little longer.
Some of the vaccines give you a high chance of being immune, potentially for years.
Other vaccines only give you a 50/50 chance of being immune, but if you do get it the prognosis is much better.
And of course in all cases you may still infect other people.
So this digital passport system would really need to know the type of vaccine, and how it was administered (e.g. Pfizer is supposed to be 2
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"all the while mandating expensive masks"
Where are masks expensive? I see where you can get them for $1 apiece. And many places offer them for free to customers and staff.
https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com]
"Papers Please" (Score:5, Insightful)
>"working to develop a digital COVID-19 vaccination passport to allow businesses, airlines and countries to check if people have received the vaccine. "
Or, instead, let people worry about themselves in a free society. It shouldn't matter if you are vaccinated or not as to whether you can travel or work or see a concert, etc. We never did this with the flu. It is a horrible precedent to set. Offer the vaccine to the most vulnerable first. After that, it is about protecting yourself, and that should be one's own choice. At most, we could just continue to expect everyone to maintain reasonable precautions around the most vulnerable, until herd immunity is reached.
Or, we can head down the path of China and have the government start micro-managing peoples' lives. I am COVID-19 vaccinated. It doesn't change my opinion. I strongly support vaccinations; I don't support making them mandatory, or essentially mandatory by trying to restrict or ruin peoples' lives who choose not to be vaccinated. Freedom comes with risk.
Re: (Score:3)
Have you ever registered a child for school? You know the school asks for vaccine records?
Re: (Score:3)
>"Have you ever registered a child for school? You know the school asks for vaccine records?"
While that is a good point...
1) Children are not adults and can't make informed decisions for themselves. It is why, for example, I support seatbelt/child seat laws for children, but not for adults (despite the fact I would NEVER get in a car without wearing a seatbelt).
2) Children are at the absolutely LEAST risk of catching, spreading, or suffering any bad effects from COVID-19.
3) Last I checked, schools haven
Re: (Score:3)
>"Have you ever registered a child for school? You know the school asks for vaccine records?"
While that is a good point...
1) Children are not adults and can't make informed decisions for themselves. It is why, for example, I support seatbelt/child seat laws for children, but not for adults (despite the fact I would NEVER get in a car without wearing a seatbelt). 2) Children are at the absolutely LEAST risk of catching, spreading, or suffering any bad effects from COVID-19. 3) Last I checked, schools haven't required a [non-novel] flu vaccine. Yet, the regular flu, for whatever reason, is far, far more risk to children.
I acknowledge nothing about this is simple or "black and white."
There are some things I'm libertarian about, but not seatbelt or helmet laws. The government has to clean up the mess, so it seem that as part of its job of maintaining and regulating public roads, it can very reasonably require seatbelts in order to use those public roads. It doesn't have to be the government protecting you from yourself, it's the government protecting everyone else from you.
Re: (Score:2)
Ultimately, the government always has to clean up the mess (or things stay messy/polluted). What are you libertarian about where that doesn't apply?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Stop comparing COIVD to the common flu, it's much worse. The UK just passed 100,000 deaths directly attributed to COIVD, compared to around 500 deaths to flu every year.
It's not just your personal choice what risks you take, because you are putting others at risk. It's like drink driving, it's not just your own life at stake. Your right to drive has to be balanced against other people's rights to drive and walk safely.
Re: (Score:2)
>"It's not just your personal choice what risks you take, because you are putting others at risk."
Most everything we do in life puts others at risk. This is especially true if one throws financial into the mix. A perfectly "safe" life is a life without freedom. There is a balance, for sure, between safety and freedom (of which privacy is one factor), but make no mistake- they are absolutely at odds with each other. And I am appalled at just how little value many people place on freedom/privacy when ch
Re: (Score:2)
The balance tends to depend on the severity of the outcome for the affected person. In the case of COIVD it could be anywhere from 2 weeks off work to death or chronic health problems.
The second factor to consider is risk. I guess if we could get the risk down to a similar level to the flu then there would be a good argument for treating COIVD the same way. We are a very long way off from that though.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The vaccines are not 100% effective, even when vaccinated you can still get COVID. The effects might be lessened but we still don't know what the effect on "long COVID", the chronic problems some people experience, will be.
Recent studies have shown that COVID causes brain damage, which is what leads to some of the long term symptoms.
Re: (Score:2)
>"The vaccines are not 100% effective, even when vaccinated you can still get COVID."
Seatbelts are not 100% effective, we still drive.
Helmets are not 100% effective, we still ride motorcycles.
Sidewalks are not 100% safe, we still walk.
Dogs are not 100% tame, we still keep them as pets.
We are not safe from Lyme disease, we still visit the woods.
Some can die from exposure to peanuts, we still eat peanuts.
Some could die from bee stings, they still go outside.
This list is infinite.
Life is dangerous. We can
Re: (Score:2)
--'we still don't know what the effect on "long COVID", the chronic problems '
What an EXCELLENT reason NOT to get vaccinated. How many studies have been done on the the LONG TERM effects of injecting yourself with 'part' of the mRNA that comes from the virus? Where are the 2 years studies? IF we should be worried about long term effects of the disease why shouldn't we be just as worried about long term effects of the disease fragment, called a vaccine.
Re: "Papers Please" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It shouldn't matter if you are vaccinated or not as to whether you can travel or work or see a concert, etc
You do need to get vaccinated if you want to travel internationally. That has been true for decades.
Re: "Papers Please" (Score:2)
"...Or, we can head down the path of China..."
This seems to be what many of the community here want, and they angrily insist such is the moral high ground.
(/Baffled)
Re: "Papers Please" (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why do you think your freedom to not be vaccinated outweighs my freedom to attend an "only-vaccinated people" concert? Why shouldn't I be able to work at a workplace that enforces "all employees must be vaccinated" policy. Hell, why shouldn't I be able to work at a workplace that enforces an "all clients must be vaccin
Slashdot (Score:2, Insightful)
New home of the anti vaxx crowd. Never though I'd see that day come around. Next week will we be having the meeting of the flat earth society?
Re:Slashdot (Score:5, Insightful)
New home of the anti vaxx crowd. Never though I'd see that day come around. Next week will we be having the meeting of the flat earth society?
No.
There is room for a healthy concern that "papers, please" doesn't stop being "papers, please" because it's on a mobile device and doesn't literally involve a piece of paper. It doesn't stop being "papers, please" because the goal is "stopping the pandemic", or worse, "the greater good".
It is not at all cognitive dissonance to say, "I believe in vaccinations, but I don't believe in the need for a 'digital passport' to prove I took it", and while I certainly can't speak for all of the Slashdot crowd, what I think you're seeing in aggregate are people who are expressing a problem with unnecessary intrusion by Government and/or Big Tech in the name of "making sure everyone takes the vaccine".
I do sincerely hope you can see the difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We’re nearing 400,000 Covid deaths in the USA so far. At worst the flu killed 62,000. So Covid is 8 times more deadly.
Papers please! (Score:3)
Let's trust big tech /s (Score:5, Insightful)
Big Tech: "We don't your social media post speaking out against big tech's control of social media. "
User: "ok... you have that right to disagree with me."
Big Tech: "We're de-platforming you..."
User: "ok... your platform."
"Big Tech: "...from all of our platforms, even our vaccine certification platform."
User: "uh... wait. Now I won't be able to prove my immunity for my job interview tomorrow!"
Big Tech: "Our playground, our rules. Start your own platofmr and vaccine cert program."
Already solved problem (Score:4, Insightful)
The "yelllow card" by WHO, as per wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] has been available and required for travel in certain countries since the 60's. It's also common to list all your vaccinations on that same card.
No need for fancy apps for this purpose. Digital versions *do* exist, but the big tech version is not really required here.
Does No Cellphone = No Travel? (Score:2)
No, I do not have even a dumb phone, only land-line. When I leave my house, I enjoy leaving the phone behind me. My wife has a dumb phone. When we travel to other countries, we leave it at home. Does that mean we will be prohibited from traveling?
Yes, I will be vaccinated for COVID-19. I will not be the first in line. I will likely wait 2-3 weeks after my priority group is eligible.
I do believe vaccines work. I had an uncle die from diphtheria because he was not vaccinated. One of my grand-fathers w
Re: (Score:2)
You should consider it. The maps on a phone make foreign travel a lot easier. Get a cheap smartphone, and then get a T-mobile pre-paid SIM card for the duration of your trip (T-mobile works well in most foreign countries).
Re:No way Jose (Score:4, Insightful)
So you are willing to spread a potentially deadly virus to many people, as well put yourself at risk of getting ill too. Just to a lonely voice to "Stick it to the man!"
Being that this vaccine is backed by government funding, you had already donated to big pharma. You are just not going to reap the reward, as well you become a greater risk to others.
I question your moral judgement making ability.
Re:No way Jose (Score:4, Interesting)
I'd much rather get sick with the virus than be a guinea pig for a brand new technology.
> I question your moral judgement making ability.
I question your trust in a for profit system that has had its liability safeguards removed.
> Just to a lonely voice to "Stick it to the man!"
In Big Pharma Amerika, the man sticks it to you.
Re: (Score:2)
The smallpox vaccine killed one in a million people who got it. That said, it killed 500M people the last 100 years it was around. It's a gamble either way, but it's much less risky for the individual and the masses for everyone to get a vaccine.
Re: (Score:2)
The covid-19 shots are a different technology than the vaccines - these shots don't have decades of testing.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd much rather get sick with the virus than be a guinea pig for a brand new technology.
Because there has been a randomized, double-blind peer reviewed study to examine the long-term effects of Coronavirus? Oh wait, there hasn't been.
You're deciding between a vaccine that has been carefully studied for a year (or longer, in the J&J case), against the unknown effects of a virus that was not designed to keep you safe. And you chose the wrong answer.
Re: (Score:2)
It's pure arrogance that people know enough to program our cells. The science is too young, and the longterm effects of their approach isn't known. They might get lucky, and it might work out, but I'll take my chances with possibly getting the virus over definitely getting an experimental treatment.
Re: (Score:2)
They might get lucky, and it might work out, but I'll take my chances with possibly getting the virus over definitely getting an experimental treatment.
That is not your choice. You have no opportunity to get an experimental treatment. The vaccine is not experimental, it's been tested.
Your choice is a disease you don't know anything about, and a vaccine that has been carefully investigated. That is it.
Re: (Score:2)
This is a new technology, not a vaccine at all, and it was rushed through the certification process. If it had been carefully investigated, then why do the manufacturers get liability protections?
> That is not your choice.
I'm afraid you're right, but I still get a choice. Give me liberty or give me death.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It sounds like you're saying viruses are safe because they've been 'tested for millions of year' - I hope you see how absurd this is in the midst of a viral pandemic.
> The difference is that this virus only tells your cells to make a single piece of some other virus rather than copies of itself.
No- this shot makes our cells produce a protein, not a virus. It turns our cells into programmed protein factories, so our cells produce the antigens.
Re:No way Jose (Score:5, Informative)
>"So you [other poster] are willing to spread a potentially deadly virus to many people, as well put yourself at risk of getting ill too. Just to a lonely voice to "Stick it to the man!"
I don't agree with his intent to not be vaccinated. But I also believe that is his right. I also think your exclamation is overly dramatic. 24 million people have already been confirmed to have had COVID-19 in the USA- they are already, mostly likely, immune. Of those left, perhaps 1/3 of people, if exposed, will have no symptoms or adverse effects even if exposed. The remainder can still control their risk with their own actions of social distancing, hand washing, etc, until herd immunity. Within a few months, millions of the most vulnerable will have had their opportunity to be vaccinated.
I am vaccinated already. That doesn't change my opinion that forcing people (or essentially forcing them to with such "papers please" measures) to be vaccinated is not compatible with being in a free society. Innovate, educate, offer, encourage, study. But ultimately, it is about their OWN risk.
Re: (Score:2)
>"So you [other poster] are willing to spread a potentially deadly virus to many people, as well put yourself at risk of getting ill too. Just to a lonely voice to "Stick it to the man!"
I don't agree with his intent to not be vaccinated. But I also believe that is his right. I also think your exclamation is overly dramatic. 24 million people have already been confirmed to have had COVID-19 in the USA- they are already, mostly likely, immune. Of those left, perhaps 1/3 of people, if exposed, will have no symptoms or adverse effects even if exposed. The remainder can still control their risk with their own actions of social distancing, hand washing, etc, until herd immunity. Within a few months, millions of the most vulnerable will have had their opportunity to be vaccinated.
I am vaccinated already. That doesn't change my opinion that forcing people (or essentially forcing them to with such "papers please" measures) to be vaccinated is not compatible with being in a free society. Innovate, educate, offer, encourage, study. But ultimately, it is about their OWN risk.
I wouldn't insist on mass vaccination for the public at large.
But if I had a parent in an old-age care facility and some of the staff were refusing to take the vaccine? In that case I'd encourage management to make some staffing changes.
Re: (Score:2)
>"But if I had a parent in an old-age care facility and some of the staff were refusing to take the vaccine? In that case I'd encourage management to make some staffing changes."
I understand your sentiment, but if your parent were vaccinated, it essentially wouldn't matter how many staff were vaccinated or not. This is why I said the most vulnerable should be offered/vaccinated first (in other posts). And that is, indeed, nursing home residents and hospital patients, not the staff. Staff should come s
Re: (Score:3)
>"But if I had a parent in an old-age care facility and some of the staff were refusing to take the vaccine? In that case I'd encourage management to make some staffing changes."
I understand your sentiment, but if your parent were vaccinated, it essentially wouldn't matter how many staff were vaccinated or not. This is why I said the most vulnerable should be offered/vaccinated first (in other posts). And that is, indeed, nursing home residents and hospital patients, not the staff. Staff should come second (unless they are old and have pre-existing health conditions, too). Of course, I would support and encourage such staff to ALSO be vaccinated, when the time comes, but not forced to.
A very tiny portion of high-risk NH residents might not be able to be vaccinated (because they have a fever or immune problem) and those residents should remain in isolation until they are vaccinated or until herd immunity is reached. And yes, that might include restricting which staff can care for those small number of residents.
The vaccine is 95% effective, not 100%, so right away you have at least 5% vulnerable and you don't know which 5%.
And I don't think the trials have robust data on this, but immune systems get weaker with age so you're likely going to end up a bit lower than that.
So yes, if those employees are unwilling to get a vaccine so they can perform their jobs without endangering the residents then they should find another line of work.
Re: (Score:2)
>"Immune, but for how long?"
Unfortunately, we don't know yet. This is why followup and studies are important. "Immunity" is complex- it isn't a binary. There is partial immunity, delayed immunity, lost immunity, etc. Plus people are different. And if the virus mutates enough, (like the common flu does quite readily), the game can change on a dime. Of course, these new types of vaccines might not require constant reformulation like traditional vaccines. And if it is successful, this new type of vac
Re: No way Jose (Score:2)
He's just afraid, mate. No reason to attack him and make it even worse.
Take his fear. With certainty and friendliess. :)
And if you can't, maybe you should look into that ignorance of your own ignorance, because what are you basing your own confidence on then?
(I can... Or at least I tried.)
Re: (Score:2)
And I am afraid of of people like him.
I have a wife who is under high risk of death or severe problems if she were to Catch Covid-19. I myself have done all I could to make sure I don't catch it to spread it to her (Including already having the Vaccine, awaiting the second booster shot) however with people going without Vaccines who could have taken it, and are also doing the minimum or below that to keep others safe still puts my family at risk.
All this because they are following fake news, and applying
Re: (Score:2)
So you are willing to spread a potentially deadly virus to many people, as well put yourself at risk of getting ill too.
It's not yet known whether and how much the vaccines will affect transmission. It's assumed it will, but the only clinically proven benefit is protection from sickness the person vaccinated. Source [fda.gov], as well as speaking with family members who work in medicine and have been vaccinated.
Re: No way Jose (Score:3)
Hmm, I'm just thinking ... any virus is a "RNA-based vaccine", no? That is literally what a virus is, from what I learned. And your DNA still has the remains of many of those patches made with RNA in it. The ones that gave you advantages, mostly.
Hell, our beloved mitochondria powerhouse of the cell is actually a completely separate organism with its own DNA, that just happens to be in symbiosis with your cells. F'in creepy, no? Yet completely normal.
Clearly, foreign genetics is not what you got a problem wi
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Humans inability to standardize things is one of the reasons we still have some freedom.
Re: (Score:3)
What a lovely bunch.
Darth Sidious was no available, or what?
Darth Sidious got the vaccine. An unfortunate side effect was that it killed all his midichlorians. He is now but a shell of his former self.
Re: A few reasons why today's Internet is a nightm (Score:2)
You are right.
There. I said it.
But why do you keep posting this until everyone, even me, disagrees?
Can't you focus on, you know, making a better Internet? ... Take my money! ...?
And
Re: (Score:2)
I guess entities are not counting recovered people in the passport to prevent people from getting the virus on purpose.
Re: (Score:2)
No, once we can get the system in place, we can start requiring any and all vaccines and other health screening to control travel, including mental health screening, we could even add Chinese like 'social credit score' and let countries pick if they like 'people like you' in their territory.
One more step to dystopia.
Re: (Score:2)
They say (because there have given NO DOCUMENTS whatsoever to the international medical community) that the "immunity" (which is not) last 8 monts.
So "protection" ends at the 9th month (with luck).
OK, you need to stop drinking the crazy juice and find a better source of information. Whoever told you that the immunity only lasts 8 months was lying. Don't trust that person anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
A better question is "who cares if the vaccine only lasts 8 months". Like, so what, the worst case scenario is we all get boosters at 8 months, and...?
From my understanding, there's an open question about how long it will be until we get the booster (if ever) - and I'll get it whenever medical experts say I'm supposed to.
Re: (Score:2)
Now you are the one lying. Pfizer did not say the vaccine only lasts 8 months.
Re: (Score:2)
Oracle has a long track record of public projects, and they have a good sales team who are not afraid to use blackmail.
unless, of course... (Score:2)
this is done as you propose, and you happily get YOUR tattoo while laughing at those silly idiots, and then in a Twilight Zone-ish twist... they turn out to be right... It would be a bit of a an interesting twist if you're attitude was widely shared, and was the very thing that enabled a society to embrace such a thing, thereby enabling such a prophesy...
There's probably a Philip K Dick story in there somewhere...
Incidentally, FYI: not all "fundies" believe in this stuff. Strictly speaking, much of the "end