Apple and Google: Germany, yes. UK, no. Why?

I do not want to be heavy with this type of news, but I find it interesting enough to be informed. Germany yes, but UK says no agrees that the joint application of Apple and Google be decentralized. How do the alternatives differ and why do some countries do and others don't?

Germany yes but the UK (and France) say no. Why?

The idea of ​​Apple and Google is to create an application that is capable of track contacts that a person who has been confirmed positive for COVID-19 has had in the last 14 days.

The app works through the mobile's bluetooth. It is the first time that Apple will allow its devices, especially iPhone, to be able to communicate with Android using this protocol.

A user of the app downloads and turns on the app. From that moment it works in the background and if that user finds contagion symptoms and a medical test affirms that it is positive (it is ideal but it could be otherwise) it declares it in the app. Immediately send the data of the last 14 days of that person. Sends you to medical centers but also to users with whom he has had contact.

That way you could track of all the people with whom he has had contact. Thus, medical services could evaluate that environment and determine if there are more infections. One way to prevent the spread of the virus.

While the data is not sent, these are on the device of the user. They do not leave it, thus maintaining the privacy and security of that person.

This system is decentralized. But some countries in Europe think that it is not effective and should be managed in a centralized way.

Centralized VS Decentralized

Germany thought this way, until yesterday We told you that I had changed my mind. Why?.

Because if everything is centralized in the same database, and the data is sent indiscriminately, privacy and security is not guaranteed.

Anyone with knowledge could enter that database and get millions of data from thousands of users, regardless of whether they are infected or not.

However, the United Kingdom does not support the Apple and Google solution and thinks that the second, centralized way is the most suitable to develop in your country. France seems to be going the same way because it has asked Apple to unlock the iPhone's bluetooth with the intention of creating its own application.

In this way, if you reside in the United Kingdom, and the application they want to create is launched, the application will record the data when people are close to each other, using a computer server to determine who to send alerts to when a person is diagnosed with coronavirus.

This approach is argued that it will provide more information on how COVID-19 spreads and allow a greater control about who receives notifications:

One of the advantages is that it is easier to audit the system and adapt it more quickly as scientific evidence accumulates. This has been stated to the BBC, Professor Christophe Fraser, one of the epidemiologists who advise NHSX.

The main objective is to notify people who are most at risk infected, and not people who are at much lower risk. This is probably easier to do with a centralized system.

Here a bias already appears: Higher risk versus lower risk.

As I was saying, I think this news is important, because not only how to manage a pandemic through technology is at stake, but also user privacy and security are in question. Two very important bastions for Apple (and Google) but it seems that it is not so important for certain governments.

Although if we analyze it well, and pay attention to the scientists, a centralized system generates less social alarm and the app may be more effective for what it was created.

The debate is served. Let's see what the rest of the countries do with the Apple and google API.