- it's automatically sent to email (if they have it)

- you can download it from ezdravlje.rs portal

The test I shared above is the one I got on email. However, I went to portal, downloaded pdf, and now I have two copies. They're different! IDs and all the data are the same, but QR codes are different.

This is the new one: https://pcr.euprava.gov.rs/validate.php?cqcode=1641923234g3D...

Timestamp on new pdf is: 1641923234, which is GMT: Tuesday, 11. January 2022. 17:47:14

So it appears that timestamp is related to when pdf is generated, and when you download it from the portal it's generated at that point of time, i.e. there are no pdf documents sitting on government server!

So this timestamp is definitely no proof of forgery. But test ID might be - that one is still suspicious.

And one more thing, when I switch tabs with my two QR codes - page content is the same but shifted a bit. I didn't look into html/css to see what's different.

Rapid test:

https://pcr.euprava.gov.rs/validate.php?cqcode=16415703349MJ...

Timestamp: 1641570334, time: GMT: Friday, 7. January 2022. 15:45:34

PCR:

https://pcr.euprava.gov.rs/validate.php?cqcode=1641924832NyL...

Timestamp: 1641924832, time: GMT: Tuesday, 11. January 2022. 18:13:52

I downloaded PCR from portal today, that's why it has today's timestamp.

What's interesting is that her test IDs are 7601574 and 7631146 while they were taken within 15 minutes from each other. There's some 30k difference, and I think Serbia runs around 40k tests a day. PCR samples are sent to central lab and processed later, that would explain why PCR's ID is much higher.

However I don't think we have definite proof of how these test IDs are generated. Different labs could be assigned batches of IDs, PCR tests itself could have preassigned IDs (you can see they have same ID when you're tested, but I'm not sure it's the same ID as presented in results). If test ID is generated when results are inserted into database, then they should always be incremental and Novak's test IDs point to forgery. But there could be other explanations.

My conclusions:

- timestamps are not proof of forgery

- test IDs are suspicious, but we can't be sure.

This is exactly the same as here: https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus/country/serbia

So I'm assuming that this dataset can be trusted.

The point:

From the dataset: Date: 2021-12-16, new tests: 13690.0, total tests: 7032035.0 Date: 2021-12-22, new tests: 14808.0, total tests: 7107851.0 Date: 2021-12-26, new tests: 9265.0, total tests: 7158932.0

As We can see Djoko's "ID" (7371999) is much larger than total number of tests for 26th of December 2021 (by 213067) and for me this furthers your point that We don't know how this number is generated. (It seems to be sequential, but is it?)

All invalid reports ("Report IS NOT VALID!") are in red color (Bootstrap 3 class .alert-danger). You can see it when open https://pcr.euprava.gov.rs without any subdir/script/query string.

This green for positive test mean just that QR code and associated test are valid, not that it’s good or bad. Positive test is bad in the first 14 days but after that it’s good - it gives you same rights as if you were vaccinated. But it’s the same test in both cases and green just tells us it’s a valid document.

Digital certificate is different kind of document. That’s the one you need to enter restaurans, bars, etc. after 20h - it will be red if you don’t fulfill conditions, e.g. vaccination or positive test within last 6 months (but not within 14 days), etc.

In programer’s lingo, test result is const, while digital certificate is a function of multiple conditions in context of current date/time.

I've done these kinds of systems many times in the past and there could be any amount of reasons why a timestamp is included like this. Especially with weird government regulations, policies and rules that mandate all sorts of info to be included inside government documents. Like adding a year or date to when a company was registered to a company's company registration no.

It sounds like you just don’t like or use Twitter. Is that accurate?

We’re not talking about random tweets, we’re talking about on-topic tweets from posters like foone which consistently post relevant content. You’re throwing the good out with the bad and claiming that folks submitting off topic links are bad apples that ruin the whole barrel. I just don’t find your logical argument internally consistent or rational.

I’ll admit I do use Twitter (and HN!) a lot, though.

Here’s one with 600+ points. You’re telling me we should block Twitter on HN. I’m saying that’s a bad idea for HN. Seems like the users of HN agree with me. HN is for all of us, not just any one user’s preferences.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29913693

https://twitter.com/TechEmails/status/1481339345822879745

Unfortunately, no data points from me, even though I have been tested MANY times due to my profession. They've got my email, so they obviously get generated immediately.

However, I do have a data point for screenshots when QR code of the positive test stated that the result was negative. This is something that happened to me as well (back in 2020, once, and never since then). It was a bug, obviously. The second part of the ID is person-specific (all my test results have that second part identical, regardless of when they were taken) - it seems that if a positive test is followed by a negative test, that happens sometimes.

When I donate blood the nurse pulls out a sheet of around 20 pre-generated identical barcode stickers, and attaches one to each piece of paper and bag of blood. This uniquely identifies my donation end-to-end.

Djokovic's PCR tests were done at two separate labs. It is quite possible that each lab is bulk-allocated a unique range of IDs every day or week from the central authority. You'd see big "time jumps" from one lab to the other if you assumed the ID was always in time order.

Depending on how they handle their range (e.g. if they are handing physical stacks of barcode stickers around) the code may not even always be in time order in the same lab.

BTW, apparently my IP address has now been blocked accessing to that website :) I get this message now: "Ваша адреса је блокирана 24 сата! Vaša adresa je blokirana 24 sata! Your address is blocked for 24 hours!"

While I guess in these cases governments don't really worry about enumeration aka https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tank_problem - it's still often a security risk that means you usually try to avoid it.

Even when internally you have auto-incremental ID - you can provide a non-sequential public ID (e.g. at least use SkipJack/Skip32 of that incremental value).

- Datum uzorkovanja (Date of sampling): 22.12.2021 14:12:10

- Datum izdavanja rezultata (Date of issuance of results): 22.12.2021 16:15:49

=> I will ignore the time needed to get the actual swabs to the laboratory and do the necessary paperwork etc and round this to ~2 hours of time available for testing.

- Vrsta analize i proizvodjac testa (Type of analysis and test manufacturer): Real Time PCR test-SARS-CoV-2, , Sansure Biotech INC; Hunan Province

See, unless my fellow countrymen have developed a way to do PCR tests 5 times faster than the fastest tests available in the (rest) of the world, this test in itself is a joke. This is the reason PCR testing: costs, is usually indicated by symptoms already present/positive antigen test.

You're welcome.

Take care

While I have no clue how they work in detail they offer 60 min express PCRs in Germany at least at my airport.

Seems to be FDA approved.

Over 800 children (aged 0-12, more than half aged 0-5) being hospitalised per week right now in the UK.

EDIT: previously stated hospitalisations were per day rather than per week, corrected above.

Hospitalised with Covid or due to Covid?

Is there a public source for those figures?

EDIT: the data at this link[0] doesn't seem to agree with your claim

[0] https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/details/healthcare?areaType=...

It is not directly helpful (or unhelpful) to your point or to the parent as data doesn't seem broken down in that way. However, in all these sorts of discussions it would be really great if things had context. So, for example (and sake of argument) if someone says 800 children per day were admitted, we had a comparison. Is it high, low? How about a rate per 100,000 comparison across other countries? Not asking for anyone to do this, merely attempting to articulate my point.

A bit of eyeball math shows 12 million people in UK under 16. Even if 800 a day was true...should I worry?

Anyhow, thank you for moving discussion forward.