I think @postulative means that … you only get one chance to make a first impression. This isn’t about what pundits say. It’s just about a first time user coming away with the impression that the app doesn’t work / doesn’t work well / works but causes other problems. It is then much harder to get that user to give your app a second chance if V2.0 comes out and indeed does fix some problems.
That is the counterargument to the valid perspective that getting something perfect may mean that you never get anything released at all.
So the decision to release is a finely balanced one. I would bet money that the timing here has not been made on the basis of the appropriateness to release but instead is determined by the exigencies of dealing with a global pandemic.
My point wasn’t about getting it perfect however. It was about the difference between unacceptable privacy implications and acceptable privacy implications.
Except there aren’t. There aren’t any laws in place regarding the use of this data.
There may be some law at some time in the not too distant future (one month?). In the meantime you are expected to install the app now.
Or the legislation may delegate the possibility of such change to the Regulations or a Disallowable Instrument or a Ministerial Determination.
As there isn’t even an exposure draft of the proposed legislation yet, I suppose, we have no idea.
They have trained me to distrust them.
So you reverse it only for pedo cases. You wouldn’t oppose that, right? If you oppose that, you must be a pedo. 
Or you must hate children.
Then you reverse it for terrorism cases. You wouldn’t oppose that, right? If you oppose that, you must be a terrorist. Or you must love terrorists. Or you must hate democracy.
I think you can see where this is going.
