So many people have had their DNA sequenced that they've put other people's privacy in jeopardy

L A Times ^ | Oct 12, 2018 | 3:00 AM | Deborah Netburn

[CodeToad]

“Sorry. I can’t see where a DNA database is any more threatening than the advent of photography.”

“Mr. X, we have your DNA at the crime scene.”, even though they don’t, but people believe DNA is proof-positive.

[cherry]

but our totalitarian govt will increasingly go after people like freepers and Christians.....they will use flimsy reasons and they will find you....

btw.....how do you feel about everyone getting a nice little chip implanted in your arm?.....that's make finding all the criminals, and us, a lot easier....

[papertyger]

can’t do that sort of stuff with just photos, but can do it monkeying around with DNA and a database allows access to all sorts of similar maybe seemingly good but truly harmful events to people and animals.

How does a database facilitate experimentation other than by conjecture on your part? That’s like saying a database of drivers licenses facilitates car theft.

Seems to me this is just another case of fearing something new without a realistic evaluation of what it can actually be used for.

Anyone remember “backward masking?” For all the hysteria that was raised did any of the hysterics ever investigate if the human brain was ever capable of receiving a reversed auditory message?

[grania]

I had my DNA done, with reservations. I wouldn't have done it if I had descendants or nieces/nephews. If I were still in the job market I wouldn't want information about any potential for genetic diseases to be on my record. I do dislike that available DNA could be used to determine if an individual is worth keeping alive, at some point in the future. (for all we know, that kind of engineering might already be going on). There's really nothing to stop a doctor or dentist from getting a patients DNA and getting it tested. (except ethics)

One thing I found disconcerting is that there's no verification that the DNA one has tested is actually their own. Assume someone was from a criminal family or had genetic factors they wanted to hide. All one does is send in the saliva sample and give their name and address.

It's beyond my limited comprehension to understand how we can be so concisely ID'd by a small vial of saliva. Or that scientists develop the knowledge to do so. Our world had one heck of a programmer!

[papertyger]

That there is some mighty creative speculation; particularly when such results would require attendant legal rubrics that do not currently exist.

[papertyger]

...but people believe DNA is proof-positive.

Cops lying to suspects is nothing any reasonably informed adult isn’t aware of. Furthermore, it is simple conceit to make blanket pronouncements about what “people believe.”

[DivineMomentsOfTruth]

Gotcha.. I agree.

[fruser1]

You're right. You're going to see more people arrested beginning with this type of evidence. The problem is, it'll include innocent people as well.

https://projects.nfstc.org/workshops/resources/articles/How%20the%20Probability%20of%20a%20False%20Positive%20Affects%20the.pdf

[Teacher317]

Now seems like the perfect time to have my and my husband’s DNA analyzed. Nothing to hide here. And if it leads the cops to a murderer who happens to be a long lost cousin, better yet.

Your faith in Government limiting itself and not improperly using information and technology and databases in their lust for power... well, that's just adorably naive, honestly.

[KrisKrinkle]

"currently"

Things change. At the time Social Security was introduced ("currently" at that time) the SS# was not to be used for identification. Now ("currently" at this time) it is so used.

[Dusty Road]

Nobody gets more creative than a greedy lawyer. I’m not a lawyer but I’m willing to bet that some of them are way ahead of me on this. And it doesn’t require much speculation at all just a DNA connection.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

In the cases where it's been used, a criminal left DNA at the scene of a crime (generally on a corpse) years ago. When the DNA is compared to commercial voluntary databases, a relative of the perpetrator is discovered, and a search of the matching individuals relatives turns up the suspect.

I met a second cousin this summer, and he asked me about a DNA match with the same last name as mine. Turns out it was my nephew. He would never have know without this tool. Also, people have found siblings whom they never met through these tools. On balance I think it's a good thing. One drawback is when women put a child for adoption, the child might use a relative's DNA to find her. More women may be reluctant to give up children for adoption.

[wally_bert]

Just one more thing.

[HereInTheHeartland]

“Now it’s being used to track down criminals. I’m good with that.”

Well yes some positives.
But there is also a 100% chance governmental entities will use it for evil as well.

[papertyger]

Things change.

That is true: things do change. But let’s look at your own example. What are the heinous impositions brought about by using Social Security numbers for identification?

Even so, there are numerous court/legislative decisions that would have to go the wrong way for even one of your hypotheticals to come about.

[UnwashedPeasant]

"Now it’s being used to track down criminals. I’m good with that."

Yeah! They can use this to lock up the Islamophobes, the transphobes, the climate deniers and other people who do not deserve to live. /s

[Yaelle]

It is truly fascinating and may one day help to get humans off this racial thing. I choose to see the good in new tech first, then worry. I will be praying that my decision to do this for one child won’t come back to harm them.

[papertyger]

And it doesn’t require much speculation at all just a DNA connection.

Sure it does. Legal liability has alway, and always will, require more than just “a connection.”

[Yaelle]

No, dna is not a death sentence. Any tendencies it shows are only that. You can counteract most of them by lifestyle or other preventions. Epigenetics is one of the hugest things.

[discostu]

Anybody still concerned about privacy does not know what year it is. Privacy ceased to exists 20+ years ago, stuff like this is just the dying embers. It’s a big data world, you’re just an entry.