2 ms·

>I'm beginning to seriously hear people discuss that it's perfectly okay to use DNA people submit in these ways and even that it would be okay for the governmen

>I'm beginning to seriously hear people discuss that it's perfectly okay to use DNA people submit in these ways and even that it would be okay for the government to collect trash and other things that would contain DNA to add people to databases. Such arguments are usually emotional It's also "emotional" to not want your remains to be compared to a serial killer's DNA. There is admittedly a property rights argument to be made. (In a way, your decendants have the "rights" to your remains, displayed in the manner you bequeathed them, traditionally a cemetery plot in western cultures.) But it's even more emotional to have attachment to random bits of litter.

conanbatt 7y ago
It's not bits of litter, is information you may not want to share. What if they use it to convict your descendants for sending their kid to the wrong school district? All headways into new ways to use technology and pry into privacy will start with the most egregious cases, murders and serial killers, and eventually wind up being used for anything. It is a tool from the state against the citizenry: I personally find the state to be powerful enough already. It can kill anyone, seize almost all their assets and hell, they don't even need to have a reason to kill you!
- dontbenebby 7y ago
  > It's not bits of litter, is information you may not want to share. I'm sympathetic to that, and if someone wants to draw up legislation around the use of DNA without some kind of due process I'd be supportive of that idea. But it would be very difficult to regulate the collection of DNA, given existing law on property rights + the fact we spew it everywhere we go in the form of spittle, skin cells, sweat, etc. Also, the utility of DNA for the purposes in the article is only present when it's tied to a person. It would be a massive undertaking to plan out sifting through everyone's garbage 1 by 1 to build a DNA database. There's much less of a privacy threat from someone collecting unknown garbage, and if you're not a suspect in a murder it's unlikely in the near future anyone will steal your trash specifically.

conanbatt 7y ago

It's not bits of litter, is information you may not want to share. What if they use it to convict your descendants for sending their kid to the wrong school district? All headways into new ways to use technology and pry into privacy will start with the most egregious cases, murders and serial killers, and eventually wind up being used for anything. It is a tool from the state against the citizenry: I personally find the state to be powerful enough already. It can kill anyone, seize almost all their assets and hell, they don't even need to have a reason to kill you!

dontbenebby 7y ago
> It's not bits of litter, is information you may not want to share. I'm sympathetic to that, and if someone wants to draw up legislation around the use of DNA without some kind of due process I'd be supportive of that idea. But it would be very difficult to regulate the collection of DNA, given existing law on property rights + the fact we spew it everywhere we go in the form of spittle, skin cells, sweat, etc. Also, the utility of DNA for the purposes in the article is only present when it's tied to a person. It would be a massive undertaking to plan out sifting through everyone's garbage 1 by 1 to build a DNA database. There's much less of a privacy threat from someone collecting unknown garbage, and if you're not a suspect in a murder it's unlikely in the near future anyone will steal your trash specifically.