This calculator helps you determine your personal Covid risk

Originally published at: This calculator helps you determine your personal Covid risk | Boing Boing

5 Likes

Works for Europe.

5 Likes

If you turn it upside down when you get the result it says “Wear a fucking mask.”

15 Likes

Mine just seemed to be suggesting the need for a Mansierre. Which is harsh.

9 Likes

I googled that and I’m very glad I did but also sorry, that is harsh.

7 Likes

I’m not a selfish science-denying mask-rejecting moron, nor are my friends, and the few indoors establishments I frequent these days are very strict about allowing such morons in, so the result is mostly “Low Risk”.

I thought it was called a Bro.

8 Likes

I seem to be at a very low risk, breaking out the skateboard :skateboard: gotta get some risk into my life.

7 Likes

Enters location.

Lights flash, sirens go off.

Welp, I’m doomed.

3 Likes

Hmm, mine just said “BOOBIES”.

6 Likes

UX Advice
Circular selection boxes AKA radio buttons imply select one of the is group whereas square selection boxes aka Check Boxes imply select all that apply.
Just saying

6 Likes

According to this calculator, merely grocery shopping in Indiana, while properly masked (but of course no one else is), is Very High Risk: 4x my weekly risk budget.

10 Likes

I agree, and I’m a huge UX nerd. But on my screen these are neither. For me they render more akin to a horizontal, non-scrolling listbox (maybe it’s different in your browser!):

You’ll find this design on mobile-friendly/reactive web pages, as it’s much easier to tap on the larger box containing the full text of the option, rather than trying to tap the small checkbox to the left (or, yes, some checkboxes enable the words themselves to be clickable… still hard to tap accurately). The larger border provides a visual clue that the entire region is interactable. I’d argue this is probably the correct choice, as the intent would (presumably) be to allow users approaching a venue to better gauge their risk. As such a more fat-fingered-friendly UX would be desired.

You definitely wouldn’t want round borders on the labels. Users have been conditioned to identify labeled buttons as being rectangular over the years, and oval/circular information more as a call-out. I know of no standard that has labeling inside the radio button. But I’m always happy to learn if someone provides reference!

As an interesting aside, this UI appears to go at least as far back as the IBM PushButtonField interface:
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/i/7.2?topic=80-pshbtnfld-push-button-field-keyword-display-files


As far as the tool itself is concerned… I’m surprised at how inefficient my gel-sealed n95 mask would be at a concert. I’d definitely be in a higher-risk category, even with everyone being vaccinated (which this venue requires, in addition to masking).

I was actually talking about the very first screen that asserts you are over 13, not sick today etc before it allows you to proceed.

Star Wars GIF

2 Likes

No real options for families.

Also “Restart” for the scenario selector? Ugh.

1 Like

There’s also this one that Johns Hopkins put out a while back, but it looks like the risk assessment is less granular, not allowing for specific activities, etc.

https://covid19risktools.com:8443/riskcalculator

Oooh, you’re referring to one of the alternate tools mentioned at the bottom of the article! Took me a while to track down the screen you were talking about. XD The calculator the article is primarily about has no such confirmation page.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.