Monthly Archives: April 2020

Remote Places

Posted on by

Last week, everyone was experimenting with backdrops for their Teams, Zoom or GoTo meetings – I have seen the Northern Lights, New York, beach resorts, outer space, and various exotic places. Quite a contrast from the mundane, domestic kitchens and make-shift home workplaces we have become accustomed to peering into. One of my PhD students, chose Hawaii for his backdrop (see above), and at one point during the meeting it looked like he was surfing as he moved his head back and forth against the palm-tree foregrounded sunset beach. The illusion is created because the backdrop does funny things with your own image when you move your head – your hair starts to look like it is moving with the wind.

It made a light-hearted change to the start and end of our meetings, talking about the funny effects. The reason my student chose the Waikiki beach backdrop was that a group of us were meant to be flying to our annual CHI conference – which was to be held in Hawaii. Normally, 3000-4000 rock up, from all corners of the globe, for a week each year at this time (last year it was held in rainy Glasgow) to network, learn and talk about our current research for a diversity of areas concerned with the design and use of tech. But like many other large events involving travel it was cancelled due to Coronavirus. For many of my students this was a huge disappointment as it was to be their first time going – but they put on brave faces. Next week, instead of using backdrops, we plan to get dressed up in Hawaii Hula clothing and leis. Well maybe. Anything to lighten the mood.

Many of us are getting the lockdown blues now, feeling restless and bored. As the weeks of lockdown drag on the need to look forward becomes ever more pressing. Some people are rebooking their cancelled holidays for next year, giving them at least something to plan for. The papers are full of ads now for big ticket holidays and cruises – costing £1000s for a holiday of a lifetime. The images of ancient sites, rain forests, glistening beaches and city skylines are very alluring but seem all the more remote. One can’t even begin to imagine what it would be like to enter a busy airport, let alone cram onto a plane with hundreds of other passengers for countless hours. How are we going to keep our distance if we are sat in a window seat and need to go to the toilet?

Many of my us are craving the embodied contact that comes with physically being with others. While we persevere with our remote meetings each day, trying to make the most of the impoverished bandwidth and the strangeness of seeing someone but not being with them, we are all getting tired of it. We are at that stage now wondering what our country will provide by way of a lockdown exit strategy. Some countries are further ahead and have already started taking baby steps. Singapore, China, Korea, Germany, Finland, Australia and the Czech Republic have begun to reopen schools, shops, gyms and other businesses.  In the UK, however, we continue to wait. Boris returning to number 10 soon will buy him more time – as our daily morbidity level continues to remain relatively high.

But whether and what it might mean to return to the ‘old’ normal is anyone’s guess – it could take months, possibly years. I looked at some photos today of Spanish children being allowed outside for the first time in two months – whizzing around on their bikes, roller skating with their arms flailing or simply just running around. The sense of joy and freedom on their faces was palpable. It gave me hope that it might not take that long.

Meanwhile, our governments continue to thrash it out with their scientific advisors. All sorts of factors have to be weighed up against each other, including wellbeing, unemployment, numbers of daily cases, relative change in daily deaths, availability of hospital places, medical staff available, who to safeguard, the likelihood of unrest, rebellion or uprising, and so on. The fear of relaxing too quickly and too soon is that it could result in a second spike, just as bad or if not worse than the first, meaning we would all have to go back to lockdown again. Keeping people cooped up for too much longer, however, is likely to have devastating and long-lasting effects; not least, a huge increase in mental health issues, economic disaster for many businesses, and many unknowns.

For those of us who see the glass half full, we continue to dream of returning to familiar but now remote places soon: re-imagining what it is like to experience the real thing rather than the digital substitute. To drink a proper cocktail rather than meet at cocktail ‘o’ clock, to go to a live concert rather than a livestreamed one, to go to a real football match and throng with the crowds rather than watch classic games on the TV, or simply to be able to walk into a coffee shop, enjoy waiting in line (not at a distance), having a banter with the other customers, and then take from the hands of the barista, a perfectly made frothy coffee with an emoji heart on the top.

Remote Tracking

Posted on by

It is great to see the tech companies coming together to do their bit to help curb coronavirus. Apple and Google have been collaborating on a tracking platform that could help governments worldwide monitor, track and manage the pandemic more effectively. Their proposed system works by using Bluetooth and encryption keys, that enable data to be collected from phones that have been in close proximity with each other. From this data, it can be inferred who else, phone owners have been close to, for a set period of time (e.g. the quarantine period of 14 days). Users can also alert health authorities if they have been diagnosed with Covid-19 and conversely, the system can text them if they have detected that their phone, and indirectly themselves, have been in close contact with someone who has been diagnosed with the virus. The term coined for this new form of remote tracking is ‘contact tracing’ as illustrated by Apple and Google’s graphic:

Continue reading →

Remote Numbers

Posted on by

The day before the coronavirus lockdown started in the UK, I had a smart meter fitted in my house. After the engineer had finished, he walked me through all the various functions shown on the digital display; a dashboard of numbers provides all sorts of stats and data about how much electricity and gas you are using and how much they cost per hour, alongside an easy to read traffic light barometer that moves into red bars (see above) if you are using a lot of energy (e.g when boiling a kettle) while rewarding you with green bars when you are being energy efficient. The idea is that you use the various number and bars to change your behaviour and in doing so reduce your energy usage and save money.

I looked at the display a few times but did nothing to change my behaviour to be more energy efficient. Quite the opposite in fact; I started using more electricity and gas, making more cups of tea, cooking more meals, spending more hours in front of my laptop, TV and doing more washing – as a result of being stuck at home 24/7 now. Best place for the display was to hide it in a drawer.

Meanwhile, like everyone else I have been gripped by numbers that are being delivered each day about coronavirus – but uncomfortably so. The number of new cases and the number of new deaths are on the rise each day. At first 2-3 people dying was considered shocking. Now we are up to nearly a 1000 a day in the UK. It is no longer shocking but expected. We have all become engrossed by the graphs the scientists generate each day to help the lay person understand what the numbers mean with respect to where we are in the quest to flatten the curve’. They project how steep the curve is each day relative to day zero. The colour coded ones show where the UK is relative to other countries we might care about. I catch myself comparing how we are doing against the US or Italy – thinking we are better off or not doing as bad. Why are we being shown this as if it was a competition? To make us feel better? Comparative graphs are a mechanism that is commonly used in behavioural change; known as social norms. By seeing how well you are doing relative to others (it could be a peer, a family, a neighbouring city or a country) you can feel good if you are below the others or worry if you are above – as it indicates loud and clear you are using more or spending more (conversely, if it is exercise, the reverse is true).

There are more and more of these visualizations appearing now, such as Sky’s: “Coronavirus: How many people have died in your area? COVID-19 deaths in England mapped”. Those who live in remote areas, like Suffolk can sigh a big relief that there are no big blobs near them. Those who live in London or other densely populated areas will notice  big blobs splatted over where they live. No wonder so many Londoners flocked to the countryside when they could. That is, before those who live there told them where to go.

For the most part there is little we can do other than worry when looking at these comparative coronavirus graphs. They are fodder, too, for the media and politicians. For example the headline on one news website: “Singapore Wins Praise For Its COVID-19 Strategy. The U.S. Does Not”

Today’s headline on CNN’s website was more in tune with the way science happens; through competing predictions and hypotheses: “New US model predicts much higher Covid-19 death toll in UK. But British Scientists are Skeptical.” The US team predict nearly 70,000 will die in the UK. The British scientists, on the other hand, predicted only 20,000-30,000 would die in the UK, based on their brand of mathematical modeling. Who do we believe?

One of the UK scientists involved, who has become a household name, is Professor Neil Ferguson from Imperial College. The UK government has increasingly relied not only on his team’s modelling prowess but also on their wisdom to decide on its next response strategy during the pandemic. It is an unenviable position to be in, as we scientists are not renowned for having the superpowers necessary to enable us to see into the future. Who knows what people will do and what will become of us when making such hugely impactful choices on how to manage the pandemic.

It goes without saying that mathematical models need lots of data in order to make accurate predictions. When predicting the weather, a tsunami or an earthquake millions of data points  are used. The current pandemic, however, in comparison, has relatively few data points that can be used.

It would be hubris not to remember the failure of Google’s Flu Trends program, a few years back, when it’s developers claimed, based on analyzing people’s search terms for flu, they could produce accurate estimates of flu prevalence two weeks earlier than official data. Sadly, it failed to do this for the peak of the 2013 flu season. Then, they had access to big data – masses of it. The current modelers only have access to small data – very little of it. Let’s hope all the lockdown restrictions imposed on society at large, that have been put in place in nearly every country in an attempt to stem the rise in the pandemic, based on current predictions and remote numbers, fares better. We can but hope.