4 ms·

I have a few problems: - 23AndMe/Ancestry shouldn't have a database of DNA -> identity mappings. - Law enforcement shouldn't have the ability to compel surren

by Veratyr 11y ago

I have a few problems: - 23AndMe/Ancestry shouldn't have a database of DNA -> identity mappings. - Law enforcement shouldn't have the ability to compel surrender of data for which someone can have a reasonable expectation of privacy (medical records, private communications, journals etc.). Privacy trumps investigation for me. - Law enforcement shouldn't have any kind of "search" access to any private DNA database. I could accept them getting information for an exact match but including relatives and partial matches is too far.

Nutmog 11y ago
I understand wanting to keep the police out of your private things. But we already let them in when they have a warrant. Are you saying DNA is more private than your house, computer, phone converations, etc? Or that all those things should be off limits to police with a warrant? Of course this is not the same as giving them free access to whatever they want. Then I could understand people's worries. Individual policemen could use it to harass people they don't like, or other abuses.
- DanBC 11y ago
  The warrant would tend to be targeted at a specific person. "Tell us what you have on Bob Jones", and not a population "Tell us what you have on everybody named Jones"
- Veratyr 11y ago
  > Are you saying DNA is more private than your house, computer, phone converations, etc? Or that all those things should be off limits to police with a warrant? I can live with the police gaining access to my house but my computer and phone conversations are just as off limits to them as I want my DNA to be. Every device I own that can store data is fully encrypted so the police have no access to that regardless of their wishes. Same goes for most of my phone conversations. I draw the limits at two things: my body (DNA) and my mind (communications, data).

4 ms·

I have a few problems: - 23AndMe/Ancestry shouldn't have a database of DNA -> identity mappings. - Law enforcement shouldn't have the ability to compel surren

by Veratyr 11y ago

Nutmog 11y ago
I understand wanting to keep the police out of your private things. But we already let them in when they have a warrant. Are you saying DNA is more private than your house, computer, phone converations, etc? Or that all those things should be off limits to police with a warrant? Of course this is not the same as giving them free access to whatever they want. Then I could understand people's worries. Individual policemen could use it to harass people they don't like, or other abuses.
- DanBC 11y ago
  The warrant would tend to be targeted at a specific person. "Tell us what you have on Bob Jones", and not a population "Tell us what you have on everybody named Jones"
- Veratyr 11y ago
  > Are you saying DNA is more private than your house, computer, phone converations, etc? Or that all those things should be off limits to police with a warrant? I can live with the police gaining access to my house but my computer and phone conversations are just as off limits to them as I want my DNA to be. Every device I own that can store data is fully encrypted so the police have no access to that regardless of their wishes. Same goes for most of my phone conversations. I draw the limits at two things: my body (DNA) and my mind (communications, data).