×
These Earbuds Drown Out Your Mouth-Breathing Roommates at  OffBose’s QuietComfort Ultra 2 earbuds are the best noise-canceling earbuds you can buy. Right now, they’re  off, which matches the best price we tend to see outside of special events like Black Friday and Cyber Monday. If you want to wait until November, they might hit 0 again, but otherwise 0 is a very fair deal—especially since they pop back up to 0 regularly. The discounted price applies to all five color options, including Black, Deep Plum, Desert Gold, Midnight Violet, and White Smoke (another rarity, as usually only the vivid colors go on sale).BoseQuietComfort Ultra 2 EarbudsSometimes you just need to quiet the world. Whether it’s to play 10 hours of Coconut Mall on a loop to help you lock in and meet your Friday deadlines (thanks to my colleague Julia Forbes for that suggestion); muffle the crying babies, sniffling neighbors, and mysterious, potentially concerning clunking noises on an airplane; or to help you better appreciate the mix on Space Laces’ Vaultage 004 EP, active noise cancellation makes a huge difference to your listening experience.The Bose QuietComfort Ultra 2 earbuds also have some of the best active noise cancellation you can find. They sound great out of the box, thanks to a custom sound profile based on the shape of your ears, but you can customize the EQ by using the app. The app also allows you to tweak touch controls and spatial audio.The battery life lasts for about six hours, or 24 with the charging case. And while the noise cancellation can’t be beaten, these also have a pass-through feature called Aware mode, which filters in outside noise but smooths the loudest bits. That means you’ll be able to hear what’s going on, but you won’t be startled. True-crime podcast listeners, this one’s for you.In fact, just about the only drawback we can find is that these might not be ideal for folks with super-small ears. Otherwise, they’re great all around, with solid call quality, excellent sound overall, and a sleek aesthetic. We think they offer good value at full price, so an extra  off is especially nice.If you’re in the market for new headphones, but these don’t exactly fit what you’re looking for, we have plenty of other recommendations. Check out our guides to the Best Wireless Earbuds, Best Headphones for Working Out, Best Noise-Canceling Headphones, and Best Open Earbuds for additional hand-tested picks.#Earbuds #Drown #MouthBreathing #Roommatesshopping,headphones,deals,audio,accessories and peripherals

These Earbuds Drown Out Your Mouth-Breathing Roommates at $50 Off

Bose’s QuietComfort Ultra 2 earbuds are the best noise-canceling earbuds you can buy. Right now, they’re $50 off, which matches the best price we tend to see outside of special events like Black Friday and Cyber Monday. If you want to wait until November, they might hit $200 again, but otherwise $250 is a very fair deal—especially since they pop back up to $300 regularly. The discounted price applies to all five color options, including Black, Deep Plum, Desert Gold, Midnight Violet, and White Smoke (another rarity, as usually only the vivid colors go on sale).

Bose

QuietComfort Ultra 2 Earbuds

Sometimes you just need to quiet the world. Whether it’s to play 10 hours of Coconut Mall on a loop to help you lock in and meet your Friday deadlines (thanks to my colleague Julia Forbes for that suggestion); muffle the crying babies, sniffling neighbors, and mysterious, potentially concerning clunking noises on an airplane; or to help you better appreciate the mix on Space Laces’ Vaultage 004 EP, active noise cancellation makes a huge difference to your listening experience.

The Bose QuietComfort Ultra 2 earbuds also have some of the best active noise cancellation you can find. They sound great out of the box, thanks to a custom sound profile based on the shape of your ears, but you can customize the EQ by using the app. The app also allows you to tweak touch controls and spatial audio.

The battery life lasts for about six hours, or 24 with the charging case. And while the noise cancellation can’t be beaten, these also have a pass-through feature called Aware mode, which filters in outside noise but smooths the loudest bits. That means you’ll be able to hear what’s going on, but you won’t be startled. True-crime podcast listeners, this one’s for you.

In fact, just about the only drawback we can find is that these might not be ideal for folks with super-small ears. Otherwise, they’re great all around, with solid call quality, excellent sound overall, and a sleek aesthetic. We think they offer good value at full price, so an extra $50 off is especially nice.

If you’re in the market for new headphones, but these don’t exactly fit what you’re looking for, we have plenty of other recommendations. Check out our guides to the Best Wireless Earbuds, Best Headphones for Working Out, Best Noise-Canceling Headphones, and Best Open Earbuds for additional hand-tested picks.

#Earbuds #Drown #MouthBreathing #Roommatesshopping,headphones,deals,audio,accessories and peripherals

Bose’s QuietComfort Ultra 2 earbuds are the best noise-canceling earbuds you can buy. Right now, they’re $50 off, which matches the best price we tend to see outside of special events like Black Friday and Cyber Monday. If you want to wait until November, they might hit $200 again, but otherwise $250 is a very fair deal—especially since they pop back up to $300 regularly. The discounted price applies to all five color options, including Black, Deep Plum, Desert Gold, Midnight Violet, and White Smoke (another rarity, as usually only the vivid colors go on sale).

Bose

QuietComfort Ultra 2 Earbuds

Sometimes you just need to quiet the world. Whether it’s to play 10 hours of Coconut Mall on a loop to help you lock in and meet your Friday deadlines (thanks to my colleague Julia Forbes for that suggestion); muffle the crying babies, sniffling neighbors, and mysterious, potentially concerning clunking noises on an airplane; or to help you better appreciate the mix on Space Laces’ Vaultage 004 EP, active noise cancellation makes a huge difference to your listening experience.

The Bose QuietComfort Ultra 2 earbuds also have some of the best active noise cancellation you can find. They sound great out of the box, thanks to a custom sound profile based on the shape of your ears, but you can customize the EQ by using the app. The app also allows you to tweak touch controls and spatial audio.

The battery life lasts for about six hours, or 24 with the charging case. And while the noise cancellation can’t be beaten, these also have a pass-through feature called Aware mode, which filters in outside noise but smooths the loudest bits. That means you’ll be able to hear what’s going on, but you won’t be startled. True-crime podcast listeners, this one’s for you.

In fact, just about the only drawback we can find is that these might not be ideal for folks with super-small ears. Otherwise, they’re great all around, with solid call quality, excellent sound overall, and a sleek aesthetic. We think they offer good value at full price, so an extra $50 off is especially nice.

If you’re in the market for new headphones, but these don’t exactly fit what you’re looking for, we have plenty of other recommendations. Check out our guides to the Best Wireless Earbuds, Best Headphones for Working Out, Best Noise-Canceling Headphones, and Best Open Earbuds for additional hand-tested picks.

Source link
#Earbuds #Drown #MouthBreathing #Roommates

Previous post

Deadspin | Top-seeded Pistons shocked in Game 1 as Magic never trail <div id=""><section id="0" class=" w-full"><div class="xl:container mx-0 !px-4 py-0 pb-4 !mx-0 !px-0"><img src="https://images.deadspin.com/tr:w-900/28768688.jpg" srcset="https://images.deadspin.com/tr:w-900/28768688.jpg" alt="NBA: Playoffs-Orlando Magic at Detroit Pistons" class="w-full" fetchpriority="high" loading="eager"/><span class="text-0.8 leading-tight">Apr 19, 2026; Detroit, Michigan, USA; Orlando Magic guard Anthony Black (0) dunks in the first half against the Detroit Pistons during the 2026 NBA Playoffs at Little Caesars Arena. Mandatory Credit: Rick Osentoski-Imagn Images<!-- --> <!-- --> </span></div></section><section id="section-1"> <p>Paolo Banchero had 23 points and nine rebounds as the visiting Orlando Magic upset the top-seeded Detroit Pistons, 112-101, in Game 1 of their first-round Eastern Conference series on Sunday.</p> </section><section id="section-2"> <p>The visiting Magic never trailed as every starter scored at least 16 points. Franz Wagner supplied 19 points, five rebounds and four assists while Wendell Carter Jr. and Desmond Bane each contributed 17 points and five assists. Jalen Suggs had 16 points, four assists and three steals.</p> </section><section id="section-3"> <p>The Pistons have lost 11 straight playoff home games dating back to the 2008 Eastern Conference finals.</p> </section><section id="section-4"> <p>Cade Cunningham carried Detroit with 39 points. Tobias Harris was the only other Piston in double figures with 17 points. All-Star Jalen Duren only attempted four shots in 33 minutes while being held to eight points and seven rebounds. The Magic shot 48.9% from the field while limiting the Pistons to 40.3% shooting.</p> </section><section id="section-5"> <p>Orlando reached the first round by defeating Charlotte in the play-in tournament on Friday and came out on fire.</p> </section><br/><section id="section-6"> <p>The Magic built an 18-5 lead less than five minutes into the game. Detroit closed the gap to two late in the quarter, but Orlando responded with a 6-0 spurt. The Magic held the lead throughout the second quarter and clung to a 55-51 advantage at halftime.</p> </section> <section id="section-7"> <p>Orlando opened the second half with an 8-1 run. Detroit responded with a 13-2 run, capped by a Cunningham 3-pointer, to make it 65-65 at the 7:04 mark.</p> </section><section id="section-8"> <p>The Magic never allowed the Pistons to pull even again. Orlando answered with a 14-3 run sparked by reserve guard Anthony Black, who had five points and two assists during that stretch. Detroit was down by seven, 81-74, entering the fourth.</p> </section><section id="section-9"> <p>The Magic made their first seven field goal attempts in the quarter but still couldn’t quite pull away. The lead was still seven with 3:45 remaining.</p> </section><section id="section-10"> <p>Wagner then made a layup and a free throw to make it 106-96. Suggs scored on an alley-oop with 2:13 remaining and the Pistons never got closer than seven the rest of the way.</p> </section><section id="section-11"> <p>–Field Level Media</p> </section></div> #Deadspin #Topseeded #Pistons #shocked #Game #Magic #trail

Next post

GT vs MI Live Score, IPL 2026: Gujarat Titans keen to continue winning streak; Mumbai Indians sweats over Rohit Sharma fitness <div><p><b>Bowling Woes: </b>A record-high economy rate of 11.34, with Jasprit Bumrah surprisingly wicketless.</p><p><b>Batting Inconsistency: </b>No batter ranks in the top 30 run-getters; Rohit Sharma’s injury and Tilak Varma’s poor form have further weakened the lineup.</p><p>Captain Hardik Pandya emphasised the need for “difficult calls” as the five-time champions face a daunting climb toward the playoffs.</p></div> #Live #Score #IPL #Gujarat #Titans #keen #continue #winning #streak #Mumbai #Indians #sweats #Rohit #Sharma #fitness


By providing a needed security patch to an older version of iOS last month, Apple tacitly—but unofficially—acknowledged that avoiding the Liquid Glass aesthetic is a valid choice.

Now, according to anonymous sources who spoke to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman, an upcoming update will address problems with Liquid Glass in macOS 26. If you haven’t updated because you hate it, or are worried the design flaws make it unusable, you are seen.

Gurman writes that Apple “is preparing what people internally consider to be a ‘slight redesign’ for macOS 27,” and that the company is looking to fix, “shadows and transparency quirks.”

Gurman’s sources sound a bit defensive, however. They tell him the Liquid Glass update “didn’t necessarily suffer from design problems,” but instead had “a not-completely-baked implementation from Apple’s software engineering team.” The fixes, then, are supposed to “make Liquid Glass look the way Apple’s design team intended it to from the start.” Got it? The designers thought everything through from the beginning, but the artless neanderthals who built their designs into software—this thinking goes—let them down.

My first impression was that it was overly generous of Gurman to give voice to this framing of the Liquid Glass story, but I have to admit that it’s also a genuinely plausible explanation for just how hated the design scheme ended up being.

For instance, while Apple has already chipped away at some of the bigger problems, Tahoe shipped with some issues that were beyond annoying and actually interfered with usability, particularly for low vision people. Before the 26.3 update in February, as OS X Daily noted, choosing the option to reduce transparency “would leave considerable transparent effects, including in sidebars, headers, titlebars, search boxes, and more, leading to situations where text would overlap and interface elements would be washed out with blurry colors and interface elements.”

Then again, some designs were heavily criticized on an aesthetic basis, not as bad implementation. There’s probably no bigger Apple fan than John Gruber of Daring Fireball, and his take on the redesign of some of the icons was scorching: “I don’t think the old icons for these apps from MacOS 15 were particularly good — Apple has mostly lost its “icons look cool” game. But the new ones in MacOS 26 Tahoe are objectively terrible.”

Gurman has claimed in the past that Liquid Glass is sort of a long game, rolled out in advance of the release of the 20th anniversary iPhone, which he expects to be a huge design milestone for Apple. Supposedly, that phone’s overall vibe will benefit from Liquid Glass. When all is revealed, maybe the world will agree.

In the meantime, macOS is getting some tweaks, and we should expect, Gurman says, “more of a cleanup and refinement effort aligned with the company’s wider push to polish its software this year.”

#Apple #Reportedly #Retooling #Liquid #Glass #Problems #macOSApple,Liquid Glass,macos 27">Yes, Apple Is Reportedly Retooling Some Liquid Glass Problems for macOS 27
                By providing a needed security patch to an older version of iOS last month, Apple tacitly—but unofficially—acknowledged that avoiding the Liquid Glass aesthetic is a valid choice. Now, according to anonymous sources who spoke to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman, an upcoming update will address problems with Liquid Glass in macOS 26. If you haven’t updated because you hate it, or are worried the design flaws make it unusable, you are seen.

 Gurman writes that Apple “is preparing what people internally consider to be a ‘slight redesign’ for macOS 27,” and that the company is looking to fix, “shadows and transparency quirks.” Gurman’s sources sound a bit defensive, however. They tell him the Liquid Glass update “didn’t necessarily suffer from design problems,” but instead had “a not-completely-baked implementation from Apple’s software engineering team.” The fixes, then, are supposed to “make Liquid Glass look the way Apple’s design team intended it to from the start.” Got it? The designers thought everything through from the beginning, but the artless neanderthals who built their designs into software—this thinking goes—let them down. My first impression was that it was overly generous of Gurman to give voice to this framing of the Liquid Glass story, but I have to admit that it’s also a genuinely plausible explanation for just how hated the design scheme ended up being. For instance, while Apple has already chipped away at some of the bigger problems, Tahoe shipped with some issues that were beyond annoying and actually interfered with usability, particularly for low vision people. Before the 26.3 update in February, as OS X Daily noted, choosing the option to reduce transparency “would leave considerable transparent effects, including in sidebars, headers, titlebars, search boxes, and more, leading to situations where text would overlap and interface elements would be washed out with blurry colors and interface elements.”

 Then again, some designs were heavily criticized on an aesthetic basis, not as bad implementation. There’s probably no bigger Apple fan than John Gruber of Daring Fireball, and his take on the redesign of some of the icons was scorching: “I don’t think the old icons for these apps from MacOS 15 were particularly good — Apple has mostly lost its “icons look cool” game. But the new ones in MacOS 26 Tahoe are objectively terrible.”

 Gurman has claimed in the past that Liquid Glass is sort of a long game, rolled out in advance of the release of the 20th anniversary iPhone, which he expects to be a huge design milestone for Apple. Supposedly, that phone’s overall vibe will benefit from Liquid Glass. When all is revealed, maybe the world will agree. In the meantime, macOS is getting some tweaks, and we should expect, Gurman says, “more of a cleanup and refinement effort aligned with the company’s wider push to polish its software this year.”      #Apple #Reportedly #Retooling #Liquid #Glass #Problems #macOSApple,Liquid Glass,macos 27

acknowledged that avoiding the Liquid Glass aesthetic is a valid choice.

Now, according to anonymous sources who spoke to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman, an upcoming update will address problems with Liquid Glass in macOS 26. If you haven’t updated because you hate it, or are worried the design flaws make it unusable, you are seen.

Gurman writes that Apple “is preparing what people internally consider to be a ‘slight redesign’ for macOS 27,” and that the company is looking to fix, “shadows and transparency quirks.”

Gurman’s sources sound a bit defensive, however. They tell him the Liquid Glass update “didn’t necessarily suffer from design problems,” but instead had “a not-completely-baked implementation from Apple’s software engineering team.” The fixes, then, are supposed to “make Liquid Glass look the way Apple’s design team intended it to from the start.” Got it? The designers thought everything through from the beginning, but the artless neanderthals who built their designs into software—this thinking goes—let them down.

My first impression was that it was overly generous of Gurman to give voice to this framing of the Liquid Glass story, but I have to admit that it’s also a genuinely plausible explanation for just how hated the design scheme ended up being.

For instance, while Apple has already chipped away at some of the bigger problems, Tahoe shipped with some issues that were beyond annoying and actually interfered with usability, particularly for low vision people. Before the 26.3 update in February, as OS X Daily noted, choosing the option to reduce transparency “would leave considerable transparent effects, including in sidebars, headers, titlebars, search boxes, and more, leading to situations where text would overlap and interface elements would be washed out with blurry colors and interface elements.”

Then again, some designs were heavily criticized on an aesthetic basis, not as bad implementation. There’s probably no bigger Apple fan than John Gruber of Daring Fireball, and his take on the redesign of some of the icons was scorching: “I don’t think the old icons for these apps from MacOS 15 were particularly good — Apple has mostly lost its “icons look cool” game. But the new ones in MacOS 26 Tahoe are objectively terrible.”

Gurman has claimed in the past that Liquid Glass is sort of a long game, rolled out in advance of the release of the 20th anniversary iPhone, which he expects to be a huge design milestone for Apple. Supposedly, that phone’s overall vibe will benefit from Liquid Glass. When all is revealed, maybe the world will agree.

In the meantime, macOS is getting some tweaks, and we should expect, Gurman says, “more of a cleanup and refinement effort aligned with the company’s wider push to polish its software this year.”

#Apple #Reportedly #Retooling #Liquid #Glass #Problems #macOSApple,Liquid Glass,macos 27">Yes, Apple Is Reportedly Retooling Some Liquid Glass Problems for macOS 27Yes, Apple Is Reportedly Retooling Some Liquid Glass Problems for macOS 27
                By providing a needed security patch to an older version of iOS last month, Apple tacitly—but unofficially—acknowledged that avoiding the Liquid Glass aesthetic is a valid choice. Now, according to anonymous sources who spoke to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman, an upcoming update will address problems with Liquid Glass in macOS 26. If you haven’t updated because you hate it, or are worried the design flaws make it unusable, you are seen.

 Gurman writes that Apple “is preparing what people internally consider to be a ‘slight redesign’ for macOS 27,” and that the company is looking to fix, “shadows and transparency quirks.” Gurman’s sources sound a bit defensive, however. They tell him the Liquid Glass update “didn’t necessarily suffer from design problems,” but instead had “a not-completely-baked implementation from Apple’s software engineering team.” The fixes, then, are supposed to “make Liquid Glass look the way Apple’s design team intended it to from the start.” Got it? The designers thought everything through from the beginning, but the artless neanderthals who built their designs into software—this thinking goes—let them down. My first impression was that it was overly generous of Gurman to give voice to this framing of the Liquid Glass story, but I have to admit that it’s also a genuinely plausible explanation for just how hated the design scheme ended up being. For instance, while Apple has already chipped away at some of the bigger problems, Tahoe shipped with some issues that were beyond annoying and actually interfered with usability, particularly for low vision people. Before the 26.3 update in February, as OS X Daily noted, choosing the option to reduce transparency “would leave considerable transparent effects, including in sidebars, headers, titlebars, search boxes, and more, leading to situations where text would overlap and interface elements would be washed out with blurry colors and interface elements.”

 Then again, some designs were heavily criticized on an aesthetic basis, not as bad implementation. There’s probably no bigger Apple fan than John Gruber of Daring Fireball, and his take on the redesign of some of the icons was scorching: “I don’t think the old icons for these apps from MacOS 15 were particularly good — Apple has mostly lost its “icons look cool” game. But the new ones in MacOS 26 Tahoe are objectively terrible.”

 Gurman has claimed in the past that Liquid Glass is sort of a long game, rolled out in advance of the release of the 20th anniversary iPhone, which he expects to be a huge design milestone for Apple. Supposedly, that phone’s overall vibe will benefit from Liquid Glass. When all is revealed, maybe the world will agree. In the meantime, macOS is getting some tweaks, and we should expect, Gurman says, “more of a cleanup and refinement effort aligned with the company’s wider push to polish its software this year.”      #Apple #Reportedly #Retooling #Liquid #Glass #Problems #macOSApple,Liquid Glass,macos 27

By providing a needed security patch to an older version of iOS last month, Apple tacitly—but unofficially—acknowledged that avoiding the Liquid Glass aesthetic is a valid choice.

Now, according to anonymous sources who spoke to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman, an upcoming update will address problems with Liquid Glass in macOS 26. If you haven’t updated because you hate it, or are worried the design flaws make it unusable, you are seen.

Gurman writes that Apple “is preparing what people internally consider to be a ‘slight redesign’ for macOS 27,” and that the company is looking to fix, “shadows and transparency quirks.”

Gurman’s sources sound a bit defensive, however. They tell him the Liquid Glass update “didn’t necessarily suffer from design problems,” but instead had “a not-completely-baked implementation from Apple’s software engineering team.” The fixes, then, are supposed to “make Liquid Glass look the way Apple’s design team intended it to from the start.” Got it? The designers thought everything through from the beginning, but the artless neanderthals who built their designs into software—this thinking goes—let them down.

My first impression was that it was overly generous of Gurman to give voice to this framing of the Liquid Glass story, but I have to admit that it’s also a genuinely plausible explanation for just how hated the design scheme ended up being.

For instance, while Apple has already chipped away at some of the bigger problems, Tahoe shipped with some issues that were beyond annoying and actually interfered with usability, particularly for low vision people. Before the 26.3 update in February, as OS X Daily noted, choosing the option to reduce transparency “would leave considerable transparent effects, including in sidebars, headers, titlebars, search boxes, and more, leading to situations where text would overlap and interface elements would be washed out with blurry colors and interface elements.”

Then again, some designs were heavily criticized on an aesthetic basis, not as bad implementation. There’s probably no bigger Apple fan than John Gruber of Daring Fireball, and his take on the redesign of some of the icons was scorching: “I don’t think the old icons for these apps from MacOS 15 were particularly good — Apple has mostly lost its “icons look cool” game. But the new ones in MacOS 26 Tahoe are objectively terrible.”

Gurman has claimed in the past that Liquid Glass is sort of a long game, rolled out in advance of the release of the 20th anniversary iPhone, which he expects to be a huge design milestone for Apple. Supposedly, that phone’s overall vibe will benefit from Liquid Glass. When all is revealed, maybe the world will agree.

In the meantime, macOS is getting some tweaks, and we should expect, Gurman says, “more of a cleanup and refinement effort aligned with the company’s wider push to polish its software this year.”

#Apple #Reportedly #Retooling #Liquid #Glass #Problems #macOSApple,Liquid Glass,macos 27

After three people died on a cruise ship struck by a hantavirus, authorities are actively tracking down 29 people who had left the ship. They’re trying to trace the spread of the virus. It’s a long, arduous, global process to find and notify people who might be at risk of infection.

Hey, wasn’t there supposed to be an app for that?

Contact-tracing apps were a global effort starting in 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic. Enabled by phone companies like Apple and Google, contact tracing was designed to use Bluetooth connections to detect when people had come in contact with someone who had or would later test positive for Covid and report as much. It didn’t do much to solve the spread of the pandemic, but tracking the virus became more effective at least. The same process wouldn’t go well for the hantavirus problem.

“There is no use of apps for this hantavirus outbreak,” Emily Gurley, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, wrote in an email response to WIRED. “The number of cases are small, and it’s important to trace all contacts exactly to stop transmission.”

On a smaller scale of infection like this, officials have to start at the source (an infected individual), then go person-by-person, confirming where they went and who they might have come into contact with. Data collected by apps from a broad swath of devices would not be anywhere close to accurate enough to give a good idea of where the virus might have hitchhiked to next.

Contact tracing on a wider scale, like, say, a global pandemic, is less about tracking the individual infections and more about understanding what parts of the population might be affected, giving people the opportunity to self-quarantine after exposure. But that depends on how people choose to respond, and how the technology is utilized by public emergency systems. During the Covid pandemic, contact-tracing via apps tended to work better in more carefully managed European countries, but did not slow the spread in the US.

Making devices accessible to that kind of proximity information has also brought all sorts of concerns about privacy, given that the technology would require always-on access to work properly. Contact tracing also struggled to maintain accuracy, and in some cases could be providing false negatives or positives that don’t help further real information about the spread of the virus.

Especially in the case of something like the Hantavirus, where every person on that cruise ship can theoretically be directly tracked and contacted, it’s better to do that process the hard way.

“During small but highly fatal outbreaks, more precision is required,” Gurley wrote.

#ContactTracing #Apps #Hantaviruscoronavirus,covid-19,viruses,health,pandemics">Could Contact-Tracing Apps Help With the Hantavirus? Not ReallyAfter three people died on a cruise ship struck by a hantavirus, authorities are actively tracking down 29 people who had left the ship. They’re trying to trace the spread of the virus. It’s a long, arduous, global process to find and notify people who might be at risk of infection.Hey, wasn’t there supposed to be an app for that?Contact-tracing apps were a global effort starting in 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic. Enabled by phone companies like Apple and Google, contact tracing was designed to use Bluetooth connections to detect when people had come in contact with someone who had or would later test positive for Covid and report as much. It didn’t do much to solve the spread of the pandemic, but tracking the virus became more effective at least. The same process wouldn’t go well for the hantavirus problem.“There is no use of apps for this hantavirus outbreak,” Emily Gurley, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, wrote in an email response to WIRED. “The number of cases are small, and it’s important to trace all contacts exactly to stop transmission.”On a smaller scale of infection like this, officials have to start at the source (an infected individual), then go person-by-person, confirming where they went and who they might have come into contact with. Data collected by apps from a broad swath of devices would not be anywhere close to accurate enough to give a good idea of where the virus might have hitchhiked to next.Contact tracing on a wider scale, like, say, a global pandemic, is less about tracking the individual infections and more about understanding what parts of the population might be affected, giving people the opportunity to self-quarantine after exposure. But that depends on how people choose to respond, and how the technology is utilized by public emergency systems. During the Covid pandemic, contact-tracing via apps tended to work better in more carefully managed European countries, but did not slow the spread in the US.Making devices accessible to that kind of proximity information has also brought all sorts of concerns about privacy, given that the technology would require always-on access to work properly. Contact tracing also struggled to maintain accuracy, and in some cases could be providing false negatives or positives that don’t help further real information about the spread of the virus.Especially in the case of something like the Hantavirus, where every person on that cruise ship can theoretically be directly tracked and contacted, it’s better to do that process the hard way.“During small but highly fatal outbreaks, more precision is required,” Gurley wrote.#ContactTracing #Apps #Hantaviruscoronavirus,covid-19,viruses,health,pandemics

hantavirus, authorities are actively tracking down 29 people who had left the ship. They’re trying to trace the spread of the virus. It’s a long, arduous, global process to find and notify people who might be at risk of infection.

Hey, wasn’t there supposed to be an app for that?

Contact-tracing apps were a global effort starting in 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic. Enabled by phone companies like Apple and Google, contact tracing was designed to use Bluetooth connections to detect when people had come in contact with someone who had or would later test positive for Covid and report as much. It didn’t do much to solve the spread of the pandemic, but tracking the virus became more effective at least. The same process wouldn’t go well for the hantavirus problem.

“There is no use of apps for this hantavirus outbreak,” Emily Gurley, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, wrote in an email response to WIRED. “The number of cases are small, and it’s important to trace all contacts exactly to stop transmission.”

On a smaller scale of infection like this, officials have to start at the source (an infected individual), then go person-by-person, confirming where they went and who they might have come into contact with. Data collected by apps from a broad swath of devices would not be anywhere close to accurate enough to give a good idea of where the virus might have hitchhiked to next.

Contact tracing on a wider scale, like, say, a global pandemic, is less about tracking the individual infections and more about understanding what parts of the population might be affected, giving people the opportunity to self-quarantine after exposure. But that depends on how people choose to respond, and how the technology is utilized by public emergency systems. During the Covid pandemic, contact-tracing via apps tended to work better in more carefully managed European countries, but did not slow the spread in the US.

Making devices accessible to that kind of proximity information has also brought all sorts of concerns about privacy, given that the technology would require always-on access to work properly. Contact tracing also struggled to maintain accuracy, and in some cases could be providing false negatives or positives that don’t help further real information about the spread of the virus.

Especially in the case of something like the Hantavirus, where every person on that cruise ship can theoretically be directly tracked and contacted, it’s better to do that process the hard way.

“During small but highly fatal outbreaks, more precision is required,” Gurley wrote.

#ContactTracing #Apps #Hantaviruscoronavirus,covid-19,viruses,health,pandemics">Could Contact-Tracing Apps Help With the Hantavirus? Not Really

After three people died on a cruise ship struck by a hantavirus, authorities are actively tracking down 29 people who had left the ship. They’re trying to trace the spread of the virus. It’s a long, arduous, global process to find and notify people who might be at risk of infection.

Hey, wasn’t there supposed to be an app for that?

Contact-tracing apps were a global effort starting in 2020 during the Covid-19 pandemic. Enabled by phone companies like Apple and Google, contact tracing was designed to use Bluetooth connections to detect when people had come in contact with someone who had or would later test positive for Covid and report as much. It didn’t do much to solve the spread of the pandemic, but tracking the virus became more effective at least. The same process wouldn’t go well for the hantavirus problem.

“There is no use of apps for this hantavirus outbreak,” Emily Gurley, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, wrote in an email response to WIRED. “The number of cases are small, and it’s important to trace all contacts exactly to stop transmission.”

On a smaller scale of infection like this, officials have to start at the source (an infected individual), then go person-by-person, confirming where they went and who they might have come into contact with. Data collected by apps from a broad swath of devices would not be anywhere close to accurate enough to give a good idea of where the virus might have hitchhiked to next.

Contact tracing on a wider scale, like, say, a global pandemic, is less about tracking the individual infections and more about understanding what parts of the population might be affected, giving people the opportunity to self-quarantine after exposure. But that depends on how people choose to respond, and how the technology is utilized by public emergency systems. During the Covid pandemic, contact-tracing via apps tended to work better in more carefully managed European countries, but did not slow the spread in the US.

Making devices accessible to that kind of proximity information has also brought all sorts of concerns about privacy, given that the technology would require always-on access to work properly. Contact tracing also struggled to maintain accuracy, and in some cases could be providing false negatives or positives that don’t help further real information about the spread of the virus.

Especially in the case of something like the Hantavirus, where every person on that cruise ship can theoretically be directly tracked and contacted, it’s better to do that process the hard way.

“During small but highly fatal outbreaks, more precision is required,” Gurley wrote.

#ContactTracing #Apps #Hantaviruscoronavirus,covid-19,viruses,health,pandemics

Post Comment