3 ms·
that doesn't make any sense. DNA is not one's identity as in the metaphysical sense of a whole "self". DNA is just like fingerprint but more complete and more (
by funkaster 11y ago
that doesn't make any sense. DNA is not one's identity as in the metaphysical sense of a whole "self". DNA is just like fingerprint but more complete and more (?) unique. By your argument, your picture + some unique number could be your identity -> your driver's license is not your identity. It's a way to identify your identity.
- eveningcoffee 11y agoSo is my password my identity? Well, of course not. But it has great potential to identify a person. For example when you do not use an unique password (but perhaps falsify other personal information) for two separate user accounts. Then your password can be used to relate two separate accounts together. This kind of interlinking is common practice in the industry for fraud detection and could be used for more sinister purposes. But lets assume that you actually share your password with your mother and only flip some number of random bits in it (you can see an analogy with DNA). Now assuming that your mother identity and password is known and you are only child in the family, your identity is also known given your password because there is fixed change distance between your and your mother password. So I would say based on this that actually DNA is less unique than a fingerprint (assuming that there is no detectable correlation between parent and child fingerprint).