4 ms·

Can I ask why? Is it because that company is profiting off of your data or something else?

sschueller 8y ago
Eventually this data will get into the hands of governments and others. Who is to say that in the future you are not permitted to own a firearm (just an example ) because you have some gene that may increase your tendancy for violence (some future research show)? What about an insurance denying you becuase of a gene? That may be illegal but it's you against Goliath. How many laws are broken by banks etc. without recourse because the ones affected don't have the resources to fight it? Sure these are extremes but if this information is available, eventually it will be used and most likely first for for profit.
- geggam 8y ago
  * side note * Government is 1 of the largest buyers of marketing data as well. They cant do the spying legally but nothing stops them from purchasing what corporations do.
- malvosenior 8y ago
  If you were born in California after 1983, the government already has this data: https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/05/08/california-biobank-stores-baby-dna-access/ https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/05/08/california-biob...
windexh8er 8y ago
I think there are some simple situations that provoke this type of response. The first is that while there are protections in place they are only paper protections. History has shown us those are not always effective. What if 23andme goes bankrupt and the data is "lost" or just sold to the lowest bidder? I am not certain of the legal loopholes present, but I wouldn't doubt we'll see a case of this happening in the next decade. The second is long term exposure to the unknown. Even if you knowingly choose to opt-in, what if that data is used against said persons at some point in the future for something they failed to consider, maybe because they couldn't know because it's not been identified as of yet? Profit isn't always the detractor. I get that these organizations need to make money. But without proper explanation (there should be a better legal framework in place for services like this that offer equal protections to both sides) and a potentially biased legal agreement, informed users will likely question the unknown of giving up information to a company who will continually be realizing ways to use your DNA for the foreseeable future. And, oh by the way, you paid them to do that. $0.02
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

Eventually this data will get into the hands of governments and others. Who is to say that in the future you are not permitted to own a firearm (just an example ) because you have some gene that may increase your tendancy for violence (some future research show)? What about an insurance denying you becuase of a gene? That may be illegal but it's you against Goliath. How many laws are broken by banks etc. without recourse because the ones affected don't have the resources to fight it? Sure these are extremes but if this information is available, eventually it will be used and most likely first for for profit.

geggam 8y ago
* side note * Government is 1 of the largest buyers of marketing data as well. They cant do the spying legally but nothing stops them from purchasing what corporations do.
malvosenior 8y ago
If you were born in California after 1983, the government already has this data: https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/05/08/california-biobank-stores-baby-dna-access/ https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/05/08/california-biob...

windexh8er 8y ago

I think there are some simple situations that provoke this type of response. The first is that while there are protections in place they are only paper protections. History has shown us those are not always effective. What if 23andme goes bankrupt and the data is "lost" or just sold to the lowest bidder? I am not certain of the legal loopholes present, but I wouldn't doubt we'll see a case of this happening in the next decade. The second is long term exposure to the unknown. Even if you knowingly choose to opt-in, what if that data is used against said persons at some point in the future for something they failed to consider, maybe because they couldn't know because it's not been identified as of yet? Profit isn't always the detractor. I get that these organizations need to make money. But without proper explanation (there should be a better legal framework in place for services like this that offer equal protections to both sides) and a potentially biased legal agreement, informed users will likely question the unknown of giving up information to a company who will continually be realizing ways to use your DNA for the foreseeable future. And, oh by the way, you paid them to do that. $0.02

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]