Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jdYYGQXXn8

Skip to the end - logging of entry and leaving a store using an app. You have to scan a code to enter using your phone and it logs you going in. Store then if it gets an infection notice has got all the details and the phone has you logged as having entered - app can send you the notice to self isolate.

tneva82 wrote:
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53177282

Hehheh. Bbc seems to know more about uk finland travel restriction lifting than Finland's goverment.

And sweden acting like petulent child. You put economy over controlling spread of virus, don't expect countries allow travel to dnd from freely while virus is spreading with no sign of respite. (indeed in finland around border of sweden there's been spike and many cases related to visits there...yet sweden insists ：it's not risk country)

Conversely, stop backing nonsense. The Skåne region has less deaths per capita than the Copenhagen region, and yet the Danish authorities ban Swedes from visiting Denmark (while letting their own citizens travel to Sweden freely without reprecussions). It's so blatantly populist that it's incredible that anyone is falling for it, and yet...

"Petulant child" indeed.

 Overread wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jdYYGQXXn8

Skip to the end - logging of entry and leaving a store using an app. You have to scan a code to enter using your phone and it logs you going in. Store then if it gets an infection notice has got all the details and the phone has you logged as having entered - app can send you the notice to self isolate.

Compulsory? Sounds unethical to me. Can't see it taking off here.

Numbers don't lie. Sweden has lot more cases per population than denmark and finland for example.

Sweden took it's route. Fine. But bear the effect with pride rather than complain. Because sweden's policy there's now fresh corona wave in north-west finland. That's why swede's are not welcome. Get the corona into control and then you are. But as long as you put economy first that's not happening.

Sweden CHOSE to have their people not be able to go to many countries and many countries blocking sweden as country go. Sweden's choice. Don't complain about your own decisions

That's like complaining you are broke after throwing everything to roulette and losing. Your choice, don't complain about results

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 Overread wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jdYYGQXXn8

Skip to the end - logging of entry and leaving a store using an app. You have to scan a code to enter using your phone and it logs you going in. Store then if it gets an infection notice has got all the details and the phone has you logged as having entered - app can send you the notice to self isolate.

Compulsory? Sounds unethical to me. Can't see it taking off here.

Well you can shop from home. At some level if the track and trace is going to work then know on what day, what time you were certain places is going to be critical to that actually working

There's no way they can introduce mandatory tagging in with mobile phones for shopping. its unethical and completely impractical, so I will shop in stores, as is my right. I've said from the start that an app is just useless window dressing. I'm not going to be dictated to as to whether I can go into a shop or not.

We've all been shopping in supermarkets this whole time without any of this nonsense in place, and the world hasn't ended.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

We've all been shopping in supermarkets this whole time without any of this nonsense in place, and the world hasn't ended.

Correct, at the same time we still have over 2 thousand people catching the disease every single day. And that's after months of lockdown. Surely you can appreciate that if you are able to inform everyone you've been into contact with to self isolate if you are found to be a carrier - or if someone else in the shop is - then clearly that means all those people and their families have a chance to self isolate. Thus blocking the potential further spread of the virus. In theory the quicker and more wide spread we adopt such a policy the sooner we can abandon it. Because once you can isolate the main body of those infected you can stop further spread. This disease spreads by human to human contact for the vast majority of cases (there are a few conditions passed by pets ,but this is very abnormal and in general the animal isn't the carrier itself, its fur etc...) So if you prevent the infected and the potentially infected from socialising then you shut down the virus's ability to spread.

If we'd put stricter lockdown measures and quarantine measures into place when this all started as a global reaction; then we could have shut down the virus's spread dramatically. Sadly we didn't and even if nations had there are many nations that don't have the structure to effect reliable lockdowns (though I'll be the first to admit I didn't expect the USA to be in that bracket as badly as they appear to be - then again the protests were a wildcard that has made the situation worse)


And as I said if you don't want to be tracked then simply isolate at home and shop online. The UK has a mature delivery system - you can get food, supplies whatever you want online and the system has adapted since the early weeks. It's more robust now than it was and whilst you might have to wait a bit longer, we are talking days not weeks or months.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
I will shop in stores, as is my right...... I'm not going to be dictated to as to whether I can go into a shop or not.

You know shops are private property right? You have no right to enter them. They can set any requirement they like as long as it's not discriminatory. If they say you can't enter without a mask, or without giving contact details, or without using an app or whatever that's up to them.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
There's no way they can introduce mandatory tagging in with mobile phones for shopping. its unethical and completely impractical, so I will shop in stores, as is my right. I've said from the start that an app is just useless window dressing. I'm not going to be dictated to as to whether I can go into a shop or not.

We've all been shopping in supermarkets this whole time without any of this nonsense in place, and the world hasn't ended.

If you've been giving them a rewards card or phone number or something, then for years you've already effectively been tagging your shopping and datestamping purchases. Hell, local game stores have been doing this for as long as as I can remember, the only difference was they did it at the counter by asking for your info instead of the door by having you swipe your phone.

If stores choose to adopt such policies, then as private entities they very much can dictate whether you can go into the shop or not.

pgmason wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
I will shop in stores, as is my right...... I'm not going to be dictated to as to whether I can go into a shop or not.

You know shops are private property right? You have no right to enter them. They can set any requirement they like as long as it's not discriminatory. If they say you can't enter without a mask, or without giving contact details, or without using an app or whatever that's up to them.

I'm absolutely aware of that. I said it was unethical and impractical, not illegal. It will lose them sales from people who don't want or can't use mobile phones, and they would be effectively holding those people and others who don't want to use the app hostage lest they go hungry. It's staggering that people would even entertain the idea of supporting that.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
There's no way they can introduce mandatory tagging in with mobile phones for shopping. its unethical and completely impractical, so I will shop in stores, as is my right. I've said from the start that an app is just useless window dressing. I'm not going to be dictated to as to whether I can go into a shop or not.

We've all been shopping in supermarkets this whole time without any of this nonsense in place, and the world hasn't ended.

If you've been giving them a rewards card or phone number or something, then for years you've already effectively been tagging your shopping and datestamping purchases. Hell, local game stores have been doing this for as long as as I can remember, the only difference was they did it at the counter by asking for your info instead of the door by having you swipe your phone.

If stores choose to adopt such policies, then as private entities they very much can dictate whether you can go into the shop or not.

I've said before but, I don't have any of those cards. See above for the rest.

If you don't have a phone chances are they can take your name and address. If you refuse to give any contact information for track and trace they can refuse you entry.

You'll then have to order food online for home delivery if you refuse to give your details (I mean the store has your details then anyway).


If you refuse to enter a shop with track and trace and you refuse to home deliver then I'd make sure you've got stocks for half a year or more because chances are you'll be unable to get any food at some point in the near-future. That is at least if the government is serious about track and trace and isn't just going to go for herd immunity and/or national lockdown once again.

Also, cases this week have topped out about 1000 per day average. (6800 this week) last time it was close to 2000 per day was 31st of may.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Overread wrote:
If you don't have a phone chances are they can take your name and address. If you refuse to give any contact information for track and trace they can refuse you entry.

You'll then have to order food online for home delivery if you refuse to give your details (I mean the store has your details then anyway).


If you refuse to enter a shop with track and trace and you refuse to home deliver then I'd make sure you've got stocks for half a year or more because chances are you'll be unable to get any food at some point in the near-future. That is at least if the government is serious about track and trace and isn't just going to go for herd immunity and/or national lockdown once again.

Well, I'm not worried yet, as I think the UK is smart enough to realise how pointless such a system would be.

Oh wait I got my numbers wrong earlier - yeah we are closer to the 1K mark rather than the 2K mark. I still think that is scary high when you consider that its still measuring in the thousands. This is also with things relaxing so it is very unlikely to improve much and I suspect will start to turn the other way. I just hope we see small shifts - though that's very wishful thinking.

Maybe. But the death numbers are still going down. Maybe now it's only really hitting all the folks who are just shrugging it off. I don't know. It would help if they followed through on publishing the recovery rates that they promised a month ago I guess.

True, but even without recovery data they've been saying for a while about values such as 20-30% of those who recover having potential long term to life long lung damage, even in younger people.

Granted improvements in treatment will hopefully reduce that value, but its still a very scary value.

The numbers are still going down, but not as fast as they were going down earlier. The numbers are slowing and at some point I'd imagine a reversal and a steady rise once again - steady if we are lucky -stagnation if we are very very lucky.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
There's no way they can introduce mandatory tagging in with mobile phones for shopping. its unethical and completely impractical, so I will shop in stores, as is my right. I've said from the start that an app is just useless window dressing. I'm not going to be dictated to as to whether I can go into a shop or not...

My wife is abused 2 to 3 times a day by people who refuse to even use the hand sanitiser before entering the little charity shop she works in. Standing by the door for 10 hours a day politely asking people to perform the simplest and most ridiculously obvious method to preserve her and their health and she gets abuse for it. Vile, shouty, indignant, self-important, deluded, bombastic, ignorant abuse. She's had to resort to calling the police on one occasion because the absolute arsehole worked himself up into such a state that she feared for her own, her staff and her customer's safety.
All to sell second hand bric-a-brac to support a local hospice. The general public can be absolute scum on occasion.
So I'm sorry if your arguments cut absolutely no ice with me whatsoever. If you can't abide by the most basic requests, shop online and save everyone the hassle of dealing with you and risking themselves on your behalf.

 r_squared wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
There's no way they can introduce mandatory tagging in with mobile phones for shopping. its unethical and completely impractical, so I will shop in stores, as is my right. I've said from the start that an app is just useless window dressing. I'm not going to be dictated to as to whether I can go into a shop or not...

My wife is abused 2 to 3 times a day by people who refuse to even use the hand sanitiser before entering the little charity shop she works in. Standing by the door for 10 hours a day politely asking people to perform the simplest and most ridiculously obvious method to preserve her and their health and she gets abuse for it. Vile, shouty, indignant, self-important, deluded, bombastic, ignorant abuse. She's had to resort to calling the police on one occasion because the absolute arsehole worked himself up into such a state that she feared for her own, her staff and her customer's safety.
All to sell second hand bric-a-bracelet to support a local hospice. The general public can be absolute scum on occasion.
So I'm sorry if your arguments cut absolutely no ice with me whatsoever. If you can't abide by the most basic requests, shop online and save everyone the hassle of dealing with you and risking themselves on your behalf.

And your appeal to pity cuts no ice with me. That shouldn't be happening to her. Those people are in the wrong. It has no bearing on me, or my point however.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 r_squared wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
There's no way they can introduce mandatory tagging in with mobile phones for shopping. its unethical and completely impractical, so I will shop in stores, as is my right. I've said from the start that an app is just useless window dressing. I'm not going to be dictated to as to whether I can go into a shop or not...

My wife is abused 2 to 3 times a day by people who refuse to even use the hand sanitiser before entering the little charity shop she works in. Standing by the door for 10 hours a day politely asking people to perform the simplest and most ridiculously obvious method to preserve her and their health and she gets abuse for it. Vile, shouty, indignant, self-important, deluded, bombastic, ignorant abuse. She's had to resort to calling the police on one occasion because the absolute arsehole worked himself up into such a state that she feared for her own, her staff and her customer's safety.
All to sell second hand bric-a-bracelet to support a local hospice. The general public can be absolute scum on occasion.
So I'm sorry if your arguments cut absolutely no ice with me whatsoever. If you can't abide by the most basic requests, shop online and save everyone the hassle of dealing with you and risking themselves on your behalf.

And your appeal to pity cuts no ice with me. That shouldn't be happening to her. Those people are in the wrong. It has no bearing on me, or my point however.

I feel that it rather does. Your argument is all about the infringement of your personal freedoms, regardless of the reasoning. These people who abuse my wife feel the same way. Whilst I'm sure you would not do the same as them, they are unable to fathom any infringement on their liberty and react with aggression when denied.
It's a theme of self entitlement and the elevation of the self above all others which is the problem here.

I agree that the Govts app that based on centralisation was an absolute disaster in terms of any data protection and I would have had difficulty using it, but to dimiss all apps and basic attempts to track and trace based on your own personal belief in freedom is extremely selfish.

So I re-iterate, you are not compelled to comply, you can stay home and do your shopping if you can't bring yourself to provide basic information, or attempt to protect others. Please do, if others who thought like you did so, perhaps my wife wouldn't have to face so much abuse.

Stores are private property, people don't have a right to enter them? If the store posts Masks/Sanitizer required, then Masks/Sanitizer are required and you aren't allowed in if you don't follow those rules.

It's mind boggling that people have such a hard time with such simple things.

There is always Amazon or other online retailers if you want to be a barbarian about this.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 r_squared wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
There's no way they can introduce mandatory tagging in with mobile phones for shopping. its unethical and completely impractical, so I will shop in stores, as is my right. I've said from the start that an app is just useless window dressing. I'm not going to be dictated to as to whether I can go into a shop or not...

My wife is abused 2 to 3 times a day by people who refuse to even use the hand sanitiser before entering the little charity shop she works in. Standing by the door for 10 hours a day politely asking people to perform the simplest and most ridiculously obvious method to preserve her and their health and she gets abuse for it. Vile, shouty, indignant, self-important, deluded, bombastic, ignorant abuse. She's had to resort to calling the police on one occasion because the absolute arsehole worked himself up into such a state that she feared for her own, her staff and her customer's safety.
All to sell second hand bric-a-bracelet to support a local hospice. The general public can be absolute scum on occasion.
So I'm sorry if your arguments cut absolutely no ice with me whatsoever. If you can't abide by the most basic requests, shop online and save everyone the hassle of dealing with you and risking themselves on your behalf.

And your appeal to pity cuts no ice with me. That shouldn't be happening to her. Those people are in the wrong. It has no bearing on me, or my point however.

Watch the two videos I posted recently - both reference that according to research from America up to 40% of infections are the result of catching the disease from people unaware that they have it and showing no overt signs of suffering. That means that you've a very strong chance of contracting the virus from someone without either of you being aware of the possibility. This is why we are all supposed to wash our hands; to socially distance; to reduce time spent indoors in close proximity to others; reducing the number of people in shops and workspaces; wearing masks; washing down surfaces etc...
Track and trace is simply another part of that system which enables us to at least identify as many people an infected person has been in contact with and have those people (and those they have come into contact with) self isolate. It's all about shutting down the virus's potential to spread whilst you're in a neutral state. When you could potentially have been exposed to it and thus could have picked up the infection without realising.



I've yet to really hear you come up with a valid argument against this; or a counter option in how people could be contacted and traced or otherwise vectors of infection shut down in practical terms (eg we are not about to equip the entire nation with bio-hazard suit and mandate their wearing at all hours outside of the home). It's one thing to dislike it and there are options to dislike it and not partake whilst also not putting others and yourself at risk; but in the end its one of the better ideas that can allow effective communication en-mass to the nation whilst also allowing for effective tracking. Especially in a modern world where we are travelling and meeting people sometimes from over vast areas. We think nothing of a 20 or 40 minute drive to a cheaper supermarket or to a specific store. Yet that can mean we have travelled far from our homes and as a result the circle of regions we can potentially directly infect is so much greater.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 Overread wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jdYYGQXXn8

Skip to the end - logging of entry and leaving a store using an app. You have to scan a code to enter using your phone and it logs you going in. Store then if it gets an infection notice has got all the details and the phone has you logged as having entered - app can send you the notice to self isolate.

Compulsory? Sounds unethical to me. Can't see it taking off here.

Iv been reading your gak for over 100+ pages of this thread and to me you are part of this problem we have at the moment in the UK, you are not willing to help other people out as you are to selfish.

Why are you so against anything that will help track and trace or prevent the spread of this disease? and your usual excuse of "My liberties/freedom" doesnt cut it as your freedom isnt worth a fraction of someones life so get over yourself

 r_squared wrote:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
There's no way they can introduce mandatory tagging in with mobile phones for shopping. its unethical and completely impractical, so I will shop in stores, as is my right. I've said from the start that an app is just useless window dressing. I'm not going to be dictated to as to whether I can go into a shop or not...

My wife is abused 2 to 3 times a day by people who refuse to even use the hand sanitiser before entering the little charity shop she works in. Standing by the door for 10 hours a day politely asking people to perform the simplest and most ridiculously obvious method to preserve her and their health and she gets abuse for it. Vile, shouty, indignant, self-important, deluded, bombastic, ignorant abuse. She's had to resort to calling the police on one occasion because the absolute arsehole worked himself up into such a state that she feared for her own, her staff and her customer's safety.
All to sell second hand bric-a-brac to support a local hospice. The general public can be absolute scum on occasion.
So I'm sorry if your arguments cut absolutely no ice with me whatsoever. If you can't abide by the most basic requests, shop online and save everyone the hassle of dealing with you and risking themselves on your behalf.

US customers like to say they support the rights of private business while simultaneously demanding (loudly) socialist policies to trample them. Just look at QAR, or rather the viewpoints QAR puts up here.

I work where I have to wear a mask, and deal with customers. I have yet to have anyone "abusive" about it, not one, at all, and I cannot really imagine how many people must be going out in the plague to shop for "charity shop" products (what is that the british equivalent to our thrift stores?)

She should probably work (I don't mean this as an insult to her, really) on her persuasion skills -- because if you frame it one way (body language aggressive, angry, defiant, dismissive, bordering on rude, looking a bit scared that the customer is probably unclean and probably not your sort) you are going to engender defiance where it was unnecessary, if you however, pitch yourself and your request another way "gosh, its a pain for me to, but my husband, he is higher risk, and management won't let me work here if we don't use this gak on all the customers, I know it dries my hands out too, but what can we do? I just want to be able to keep the store open so you can get a little normal shopping in!")

Its the difference between creating alliance and animosity in your customer, and remember, people are very at the edge of their own pscyhological window with all that's going on. (In the USA, with our pervasive revolt/riot running couple weeks, the most terrified customers I see are wives of policemen, who universally have reported attacks on (and attempted murder on) their husbands. "Its just part of being a cop now, there are organized groups trying to kill you." one said, she was in tears. I pointed out the sanitizer and said "yeah, I can't fix that, but I can give you a little sanitizer so you know you don't track some virus home." She took it.)

Point I am making is, people are WAY at the edge of their envelopes. (That's where they cancel the postage, baby) .. .they have families home in lockdown times many months that usually are in school or at work, they have had to renegotiate their personal space and relinquish authority within their own spheres of home influence in a series of compromises with FAMILY. Nothing in western culture is more hard fought. Many of them are simultaneously being falsely accused (if widely and unspecifically) of racism, or or "killing grandma" or of daring to go for a walk with their dog and bring down the government. Many are terrified of the plague beyond reason (having watched the media's mounting toll and having forgotten that 90 percent of those cases are already over and resolved and that something like 99 percent of them resolved without bad events)

So yeah, you get all up in someone's face, or YOU be nervous, you create a situation that isn't needed or necessary, which could easily be de-escalated. Doing so isn't rocket science, but there is a science to it -- and if your wife is repeatedly having this sort of trouble, it may be an intersocial skillset or training point she has yet to internalize appropriately.

Please consider this as friendly advice -- god knows if I wanted to be a dick in here, I would have plenty of chances -- but maybe the exercise of seeing this through the angry customers' eyes can give her some verbal ammunition to defuse a tense situation or two. Cheers!

I dunno, that may be giving people way to much credit. There are many people of many ages and backgrounds who use retail as their vent for negative emotions and will take any excuse to do so. Take the average Karen as a infamous example. While interpersonal skills is important when you're the person who has to give people bad news or give them instructions you're likely to run into a few people who will use that as an excuse to be confrontational or abusive.

Fraudulent cards claiming a blanket exception to face mask rules - what a time to be alive.

 Overread wrote:
If you don't have a phone chances are they can take your name and address. If you refuse to give any contact information for track and trace they can refuse you entry.

You'll then have to order food online for home delivery if you refuse to give your details (I mean the store has your details then anyway).


If you refuse to enter a shop with track and trace and you refuse to home deliver then I'd make sure you've got stocks for half a year or more because chances are you'll be unable to get any food at some point in the near-future. That is at least if the government is serious about track and trace and isn't just going to go for herd immunity and/or national lockdown once again.

Yep, that's how a 'soft" fasicst state works. They don't imprison you or execute you for refusing to do what they think is best. The just make it impossible to live any sort of life if you don't. Sure, you're "free" to refuse t be tracked everywhere and have every purchase tracked, but the new mantra is that "You have freedom to choose, you're not free from consequences of your choices!"

So yes you have a right to privacy, it's just that if you act on it you will suffer consequences carefully calculated to be impossible to live with.

But hey, "FREEDOM!"

Yes, yes, I know, COVID!! I know it's "necessary" to "Protect the public!" I also know that necessity and the public's welfare have been used by nearly every totalitarian regime in history. So even in cases where these might be valid issues i can;t help looking at them with extreme discomfort. Look at all the "security" laws passed after 911, the patriot act which pretty much wiped out most people's rights and any restraints of government power. It's been 19 years since the attacks on 9-11, those laws have not been rescinded, not been repealed, not been weakened, they have been strengthened time and time again.

Even tho a big part of me sees the right and need of most of these covid measures, I just can't make myself to believe they'll go away once the threat is gone. More privacy permanently eliminated, more rights overruled. More power to the police and surveillance state. Sure,. they're not taking 'your right to refuse" away from you, they're just setting it up so you can't live if you exercise that right. 'm really of two minds on it all. I really do see both sides and agree that both have some validity. I think the ro restriction side is just a bit more valid, for now. I'm not so sure if they'll turn out to be right if/when none of these new surveillance powers hang around long after covid is gone. The restriction favoring side is right, for now, i don't know if it will be later.

On the lighter side of covid today, Mike Pence blamed the new surge in covid cases on all those selfish spoiled entitled undisciplined young people who went out as soon as the restrictions were lifted. This coming from a guy who refused to wear a mask to a hospital.

If you’ve never seen retail customers abuse staff, I don’t know what to tell you. Even before the pandemic, even before the advent of culture war nonsense, retail workers were inundated with abuse.

There is absolutely no way the global pandemic and economic uncertainty reduced the abuse.

 Matt Swain wrote:

 Overread wrote:
If you don't have a phone chances are they can take your name and address. If you refuse to give any contact information for track and trace they can refuse you entry.

You'll then have to order food online for home delivery if you refuse to give your details (I mean the store has your details then anyway).


If you refuse to enter a shop with track and trace and you refuse to home deliver then I'd make sure you've got stocks for half a year or more because chances are you'll be unable to get any food at some point in the near-future. That is at least if the government is serious about track and trace and isn't just going to go for herd immunity and/or national lockdown once again.

Yep, that's how a 'soft" fasicst state works. They don't imprison you or execute you for refusing to do what they think is best. The just make it impossible to live any sort of life if you don't. Sure, you're "free" to refuse t be tracked everywhere and have every purchase tracked, but the new mantra is that "You have freedom to choose, you're not free from consequences of your choices!"

Eh, I mean capitalists have been using the "or you're free to starve instead" cudgel for a long time now and we generally seem to accept that.

At least with this it's actually about public health and safety, instead of something like justifying unlivably low wages.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:

 Overread wrote:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jdYYGQXXn8

Skip to the end - logging of entry and leaving a store using an app. You have to scan a code to enter using your phone and it logs you going in. Store then if it gets an infection notice has got all the details and the phone has you logged as having entered - app can send you the notice to self isolate.

Compulsory? Sounds unethical to me. Can't see it taking off here.

How does wearing a mask in order to prevent the spread and further unneeded deaths go against peoples morals?

Unless it is way different where you live, I don't think you have the right to go out and shop. The shop has the right to let you shop there, but you have no rights to actually go out and shop. That isn't a thing.

 queen_annes_revenge wrote:
There's no way they can introduce mandatory tagging in with mobile phones for shopping. its unethical and completely impractical, so I will shop in stores, as is my right. I've said from the start that an app is just useless window dressing. I'm not going to be dictated to as to whether I can go into a shop or not.

We've all been shopping in supermarkets this whole time without any of this nonsense in place, and the world hasn't ended.

Yes, they can. I don't think you know what unethical means at this point. Unless it is way different where you live, I don't think you have the right to go out and shop. The shop has the right to let you shop there, but you have no rights to actually go out and shop. That isn't a thing.

You have said from the start this is all fake and you don't believe it. So really what you have to say about an app means nothing. Also, a lot of us are actually following the rules in supermarkets. Do not lump us in with you, the world hasn't ended because some of us have common sense.

It's curious how ethics and morals is brought into question. What's more ethical in an emergency situation? To perform actions or bring in laws that may force people to act in a slightly different way in the name of protecting more vulnerable people? Or to do nothing and simply let the vulnerable die or be injured while maintaining freedom for others?

Personally i'd prefer the former. Not for my own safety as i'm unlikely to become one of the fatalities of covid, but for members of my family and community that aren't as likely survive. Yes there's a possibility laws and regulations brought in could be stretched or used in ways not intended but with any law, plan or scheme put in place to help people there are those who will abuse it.