This article from the micro-channel public number: see ideal (ID: ikanlixiang), Author: Hou Chen, the original title of “health code | overlooked digital control pressure, and Its Source “, header image source: IC photo
In the past month, I believe that the vast majority of readers have used the “health code”. This digital technology, which was born during the epidemic and suddenly became very strong, has also recently seen key changes.
Originally, the “health code” developed in various provinces and cities was launched very quickly. It has gradually begun to realize national networking and can be recognized between each province.
Of course, the general meeting should come. In the article of “Beijing Youth Daily” on March 27, titled “Health code requires” roaming “and” long travel “”, the opening article proposes that the health code “retires after the epidemic.” “, And then pointed out that this ending is” saving “and” sorry “, the article then proposed:
Moreover, the promotion of social governance innovation and the construction of smart cities also require the support of big data. Can there be a second option, which is to promote transformation, tap the value of data, expand application scenarios, and enable the new development of the “health code” in the post-epidemic period.
On March 24th, at the 52nd ventilation meeting on epidemic prevention and control in Guangzhou, the new “Sui Kang Ma” was released and will appear as a real-name electronic ID card, and began to implement application.
A new era may slowly be pulled apart.
One step away from “Digital Leviathan”
Before 2008, the subway only needed to buy tickets, and the ticket was completely separated from the personal identity of the person. Since the Beijing Olympic Games, the subway security inspection measures that were originally strengthened during the Olympic Games have been normalized, and Shanghai has also done so after the 2010 World Expo. For example, although Guangzhou canceled security inspections after the 2010 Asian Games, most cities in the country have normalized subway security inspections in 2014 and 2015.
At that time, the normalization of subway security inspections was a public event that caused great controversy. China is the only country in the world that has implemented the normalization of subway security inspections on a large scale throughout the country. But this time, following the implementation of the health code, subways in many places across the country have implemented the “real-name system” ride. This highly controversial public policy has successfully landed in this epidemic.
This may end with the epidemicThe health code system after the end is retained together. Since then, taking the subway requires another level of inspection than security. This is just to look at the impact of the “health code” from one side of the subway management system, but do not underestimate its impact. The “health code” is by no means “another management measure.”
Health code is special, it is the first “mobile phone-based” and “3D face recognition” and “multiple occasions population management” measures .
Based on the mobile phone, it means that it may change the management and control standards at a very agile speed, with almost no deployment cost. If it is necessary to adjust the control measures for certain groups of people or even someone, it can be completed in an instant.
Based on 3D face recognition and strict one-person-one-code, it represents the real-name system that can reach the highest standards. And based on the machine data background, it has the strongest anti-counterfeiting features.
Multi-occupation population management means that it can be used across scenarios. In the rehearsal of this epidemic, it can not only achieve “access” on certain occasions, it has even begun to become the basis for the community’s “permission”.
So we already have a high installed penetration rate (As of March 24, Guangzhou, the number of people who hold code has accounted for 72.39% of the permanent population) < / span>, real-name anti-counterfeiting, can easily manage access and exit, and deploy and change rules at a very low cost, accurate to human restriction systems.
It is very responsible to predict that the health code will become the super hub of urban control in the future, and take advantage of the epidemic situation to achieve ultra-high installed capacity at one time.
At that time, “body health” will have a broader meaning and become a “social health” in a larger sense, and truly make the unhealthy people “inaccessible.”
Reading here, I think you will believe that the “health code” will survive and gain wider application.
But you may not understand what logic follows the spread of health risks? Or you think that information privacy is only an illusory “personality right”. As a good law-abiding person, although the health code will bring you inconvenience, it will never have a fundamental impact.
Fragile cities, continuing health risks
Since the beginning of the 21st century, bird flu and upper respiratory tract epidemics have been frequently reported, which is directly related to large cities, intensive farming, and high mobility. The new crown pneumonia, as the newest and most powerful one in this pedigree, shows this the fragility of intensive modern life .
Especially in China, 14 of the 50 most populous metropolitan clusters in the world are in our country, and because of the dense population, a large number of animal breeding and slaughterhouses are close to the population. With the further expansion of the breeding industry and the further increase of urban population density, the risk of zoonotic epidemics, especially diseases of upper respiratory tract infection, will only increase.
In addition to the domestic transportation network, the international transportation network is increasingly developed, and the virus will spread faster and faster.
You may think that we must have the means to control the risks of the breeding industry. Of course, it is possible to completely isolate the farm from the exchange of outside animals and keep each animal separately instead of intensively under ventilation. Together, or move the farm away from the dense city to a farther place, the meat sent to the city will be borne by long-distance freight, and be disinfected and quarantined.
These are theoretically possible, but the price of chicken may be doubled or tripled.
Moreover, more isolation means more fragility , we all know that if a child grows up in a sterile environment from an early age, it is almost impossible for him to survive in the natural environment.
As humans live in a cleaner environment, our resistance to many bacterial viruses is also missing, and malaria is one of them.
The more isolated and hygienic, the more vulnerable .
In the 21st century, avian influenza viruses have evolved specifically to overcome human modernity. Their high variability makes vaccine preparation very difficult. In the best years, the vaccine ’s effectiveness is only About 60%, the disease has a low fatality rate, incubation period, high contagiousness, animal-to-human transmission, and human-to-human transmissionHuman characteristics are simply characteristics that perfectly fit contemporary urban life.
Therefore, we are faced with a dilemma. With the expansion of intensive cities, the increase in population movement, and the susceptibility of the breeding industry due to cost constraints, we will inevitably be in a “zoozootic” in the future High-risk tensions.
As long as such risks exist, health risks will become a spreading risk, and the meaning of health will continue to increase.
“Too much done is better than not done enough”-a source of new ethics
The core logic of this risk spread is: in the face of diseases like new coronary pneumonia, preventive measures are always better than insufficient.
The reason is that if a viral infection is captured by a vaccine, then this is a purely scientific event and a pure “health event.”
But if we face a disease with high variability and high latency, it immediately goes beyond the scope of a “scientific event” and becomes a “public moral event”.
That is, we believe that In this case, the method of fighting the epidemic is not science, but “self-discipline.”
Personal self-discipline is never enough, and we have not yet learned to believe in the self-discipline of others. Bringing “heteronomy” by administrative means has reached a consensus very easily.
Especially for the limitation of individual freedom, excessive violation of individual freedom is understandable, but it is better than not doing enough to protect individual freedom.
So stop medical staff from returning to the community? Medical staff is indeed a group with high health risks. Personal freedom can be compromised, so why can’t public morals be compromised?
Here we are facing a logic of “new morality”, which will become the basic logic of the expansion of health.
The connotation of this new morality is based on The right to life is the absolute first power, and the public health risks of epidemics have become an urgent crisis endangering the right to life. Therefore, it intervenes in a preventive way to achieve “prudent control of high-risk groups “, Became the first public morality . This translates into an urgent need for the identification and control of high-risk groups.
If the so-called “high-risk people” have perfect moral self-discipline, naturallyLet everyone consciously isolate themselves at home. But in these two articles ” Do not let “public suspicion” become the legacy of the epidemic “, After the” paper clip “event, reconsider” Guessing Culture “again In “public suspicion”, we are always worried that the high-risk people will lose their virtue and threaten us.
Here, we urgently call on Leviathan to intervene administratively in a way that is “overdone”.
Please note that although we regard the “epidemic” as some kind of destruction to “public well-being”, it is precisely in this new morality that we distort the nature of “public” at this time, and we try to transform it into a certain Kind of personal crisis.
We do n’t claim that the destruction of public well-being is shared in a “fair” way in the public, and we want to identify “high-risk groups” so that we can stay out of business.
The health code is precisely a way to allow “public health risks” to be accurately shared between people based on luck. People who lose luck are restricted and we can maintain a normal life.
This is completely consistent with our logic of isolating Hubei people, medical personnel, and overseas returnees, and it has repeatedly reminded us of our deep-rooted hypocrisy.
Health risk has become a moral hazard that is not self-disciplined, and administrative measures are complementary to this “insufficient self-discipline”.
So who is the high-risk group with “inadequate self-discipline”? This is precisely not judged by self-discipline ability, but by the degree of risk they are exposed to infectious diseases. This is entirely determined by the division of labor.
People engaged in breeding and slaughtering are of course very dangerous. People engaged in virus research are very dangerous, and medical personnel are very dangerous. High-stream in the cityDynamic, people in contact with a large number of people are very dangerous. They are bank employees, waiters in restaurants, couriers and takeaways, drivers of taxis and special cars.
Should they be isolated from public gatherings on a large scale? For example stadiums, city festivals, large parks.
What about non-hukou floating population? Of course, people who rent a house are more dangerous than people who buy a house. People who take public transportation every day are more risky than people who drive private cars every day. Do they want a certain degree of restriction?
On those very important occasions? Is there a need for a stricter admission system for places where officials are expensive, places for the elderly and children, and large squares in the heart of the city? Do people who need a more special health check get a special health code to get in and out of these occasions?
So, the right to this health check will become a new privilege.
At those special times? During the Spring Festival and Golden Week, the flow of people is greater and denser. Should high-risk groups be denied the right to go out and play at this time?
I am not a person with a lot of imagination. As long as we insist on “doing too much is always better than not doing enough”, then high-risk people will always have the moral flaw of “inadequate self-discipline”, and we will invent much more restrictive methods.
Pray that you are not a high-risk group.
Post Comment, a hotbed of rough consensus
How did we get to this step and why did the launch of the “Health Code” run smoothly, with little reflection or doubt.
Until now it will become the shackle we wear for a long time, and we still have no opinions.
Since the beginning of the epidemic, have we participated in any discussions or appeals for epidemic prevention measures?