[Proziam]

You seem to love misrepresenting people's views, or perhaps you just really don't comprehend them.

No, I don't think the unfortunate should be harmed or taken advantage of. I also don't think anyone should be forced to surrender their rights to governments, period. Everyone should have an equal opportunity to prosper in this world. That is impossible so long as there's some 'higher power' manipulating the system to the advantage of one group or another.

I hate war. I hate when the police enforce evil policies and eviscerate the lives of innocent people. I hate when governments play god and overthrow other governments for the financial gain of a select few.

You know what else I hate? When governments cover up the truth and cause massive pain and suffering. The Chinese government spies on their people, they used that system to silence the story about this virus which is now infecting people around the globe.

Giving up your right to privacy, speech, and defense is [1]literally exactly how this happened in the first place.

If the truth had gotten out sooner, it could have been contained. Instead, the world economy is grinding to a halt and people are dying. All thanks to a government spying on its people's cell phone

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/06/whistleblower-...

[throwanem]

Meanwhile, contact tracing, in places like South Korea, Hong Kong, and Singapore, appears to have made a major difference in the rate of transmission. In those countries, people have to some greater or lesser extent traded privacy for security, and - so far, at least - it appears to be working.

Is that a choice they all individually made? Of course not. There are penalties for noncompliance, same as for laws here in the US, whether you agree with them or not. Did that also, though, save a lot of lives? Ask again in a year, I suppose; it's too soon to tell.

But by the same token, it's too soon to call that a failure, at least if lives saved is a figure of merit.

I think it should be. I'm not averse in concept to the sacrifice of life in defense of principle, but I am very much averse to the sacrifice of some life in defense of others' principle.

You spoke earlier of the horrors of dictatorship, of totalitarianism, and the like? As far as I'm concerned, every one of them starts right here. If you want to die on behalf of whatever principles you hold dear, you're welcome. That's your life to spend. It is the only life that's yours to spend.

[Proziam]

Yet you're advocating to arrange things for everyone according to your principles which can also, demonstrably, cost lives. I'm advocating that individuals make choices for themselves about when to work together to solve a crisis, or when to avoid one another, or when to collaborate with their government, or when to oppose it.

Totalitarian regimes start with the people being stripped of their freedoms. In every case throughout history, they have stripped people of their rights to speech and defense.

> I am very much averse to the sacrifice of some life in defense of others' principle.

Then advocate for a better healthcare system and government accountability. They don't need to have the system to track people in order to provide healthcare, restrict foreign travel, or issue public guidance on how to handle the situation.

Besides, most people would happily volunteer the information, assuming it was on their terms and reasonably secure. But it never is.

> lives saved figure of merit

I agree, it should be. But you're not counting the lives lost or destroyed by the choice you favor. The "compromise" isn't to give up rights, it's to improve healthcare and preparation for situations like this.

Evil regimes killed 100+ Million people in around a 100 year period. Not allowing governments the power to do that level of evil saves more lives than the coronavirus could ever take.

[throwanem]

> Then advocate for a better healthcare system and government accountability

Yes. But failing that, I'll take contact tracing and risking fines for breaking quarantine - which I would now be liable for, assuming I had also even been able to be tested in order to become a confirmed case, which is apparently too much to ask at the moment - over the combination of adtech surveillance for no greater point than to make money, and incompetent government response that seems all but guaranteed to end five or six figures' worth of lives minimum, that we have now.