Interesting website but terrible analysis. Nowhere do they define what high compliance means.

Wyoming has the worst results in their social distancing despite the lowest population density in the US. (6/square mile) https://data.covid.umd.edu/findings/index.html

Not to mention, one of the lowest rates of COVID-19 deaths per capita in the US. We literally can count on our fingers the number of COVID-19 casualties in the state. We've been really lucky in that, but it also shows that these shelter-in-place metrics here have almost not correlation (here) to effectiveness of preventing corona virus spread.

Yes, 100% compliance is low. We already knew people weren't going to be 100% compliant.

I would say it's close to 80% for most people right now, which is pretty darn good considering what's being asked of us.

Thankfully our outcome is still significantly better than what the models predicted, and that's a reason to celebrate.

I haven’t fully explored their portal. However I find it really hard to square with other data, such as a 90% reduction in NYC subway data.

https://iquantny.tumblr.com/post/616488508041936896/nyc-subw...

Of course, people wake up to the reality of it. Everybody dies, life is short.

So of the people with smartphones, who also carry them with them everywhere, and allow location services, and somehow were added to the dataset of anonymized user location data, presumably by using crappy "free" services, compliance is low.

Well golly gee. People that don't care seem to not care. Meanwhile I haven't seen my friends and family in two months and have a locked down mobile device that doesn't even have the google play store on it, for privacy.

I mean you are the exception here. I see teenagers hanging out and tons of people in parks and stores. Most are mask less. Now is the time to double down on social distancing.