5 ms·

This will be an unpopular opinion but we should index the DNA of every citizen. The two objections are 1) exposing genetic health info 2) foreign countries can

This will be an unpopular opinion but we should index the DNA of every citizen. The two objections are 1) exposing genetic health info 2) foreign countries can identify our spies. For #1, I have news for you: insurance companies already build risk profiles of you, DNA profiles are not going to tip the balance of your premiums against what they already know. This ship has sailed. (and TBH if they didn't insurance would likely be even more unaffordable and out-of-reach than it already is) For #2, I can't say. But think of the benefits: how many more crimes would be solved? How many LESS innocent people would go to prison for crimes they didn't commit? Plastic straws, browsing history and DNA indexing are white people problems, IMHO. Look at what it's like to be black in America in 2019: Botham Jean was sitting in his own apartment, eating ice cream, watching a ball game when a white off-duty Dallas police officer broke in and murdered him for no reason. She'll be out of prison in 5 years. The rise of body cams has the last 10 years has shown these types of incidents happen more frequently than we ever wanted to admit. How many people are hurt in real life by things like DNA indexing? Please. It must be nice to be so rich to worry about frivolous non-problems like these. A national DNA index could keep a lot of innocent (mostly minority) people out of prison but oh no god forbid a white person be revealed to have a genetic marker for Alzheimers and their insurance premiums go up. The horror.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
TurkishPoptart 7y ago
Heh, nice try, FBI.
opwieurposiu 7y ago
DNA can be synthesized for $2 a gene. DNA tests as used in crime labs only check dozens/hundreds of genes to make a match. With a database of everyone's DNA, anyone can be framed for anything. https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/synthetic-gene-cost-slashed-to-2/3008491.article https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/synthetic-gene-cost-slas...
- krick 7y ago
  This is interesting. But can I know ahead which genes will be tested? Is it always the same set? Basically, I'm asking: is this really true? Given a drop of your blood I can frame you today for anything plausible for under a $1000? It's kind of difficult to believe.
  - bradknowles 7y ago
    Yup, it's always the same SNPs. They can only test a relatively small group of SNPs, and they chose the ones that (at the time) believed differed the most from one person to the next, so as to maximize the probability of being able to distinguish between individuals. But if you've got everyone's DNA, then you can calculate those SNPs for everyone, and then easily create kits that would allow you to frame anyone you want just by leaving behind samples of "their" DNA at the crime scene of choice.
    - Obi_Juan_Kenobi 7y ago
      DNA fingerprinting does not utilize SNPs; it uses RFLPs.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
    - krick 7y ago
      I feel like I'm asking something you already answered, but just to make sure: this implies, that to frame specifically you I don't need everyone's DNA, I just need a sample of yours, right? And if I understand correctly, DNA evidence is treated with quite a respect in court? So, if I really can make a sample of "fake DNA" (that will be indistinguishable from the "real" for forensics purposes) for a couple hundreds dollars, I really can frame anyone I know for anything (right now!), because getting a sample of their DNA isn't really that difficult. It doesn't quite add up in my head, because if it's so simple, why the courts would even consider it hard evidence?
  - 7y ago
ttobbaybbob 7y ago
Such a database would certainly have been valuable to anyone who ever wanted to commit genocide. It's easy to see the short-term, first-order positive results. However the power to abuse such information is basically unlimited.
- burneraccount12 7y ago
  Wait, WHAT? How are people going to use a DNA database to commit genocide? How are these people going to be killed en masse? What would stop someone from using the same method without a DNA database? This argument makes no sense...the thing stopping genocide now is not the inability to identify people based on their genetic characteristics.
exolymph 7y ago
You should look up the no-due-process list of "terrorists" (some real, I grant) who have problems at airports. Then think about what governments like to do with lists of people in general.
- burneraccount12 7y ago
  Exactly! If we had a DNA database we could quickly clear people as innocent. Instead we rely in inaccurate authentication measures like birthdays and names and photos...hence endless suffering. DNA would positively or negatively identify people. Besides, people are already voluntarily doing this at airports as part of the CLEAR program. So your horrible awful terrible nightmare scenario...literally goes on every day at major American airports.
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    > If we had a DNA database we could quickly clear people as innocent. Only when you have a sample to compare it to that definitively came from the perpetrator (not just “was found at the scene and can indicate that whoever it came from was present”.) That's actually not all that common.
    - burneraccount12 7y ago
      Is the TSA the FBI? They're not looking for perpetrators, they're looking for terrorists. I promise you the US government has a vast database of biometric information of suspected terrorists. The fact we all have to suffer thru terrible, imperfect authentication techniques like looking at your birthday shows we should have a database to save us all the grief. Honestly all your arguments are actually GREAT reasons to have a national DNA index.
ggggtez 7y ago
I think the idea of this post is contradictory. Who suffers from government lists of potential terrorists, criminals, and their relatives? It's not a "white people" problem. That would be a problem faced primarily by dark-skinned people. And really, what else would the government do with a database of the DNA of every person in the country, other than use it to track and profile people of color? Could you imagine being "stop-and-frisked" for your DNA to see if you were related to any known criminal, and then questioned under suspicion that you might know where they are hiding? It seems simply crazy to say in one breath that government and police abuse their power, and then in the next say you want to give them authority to keep files on every single person with impunity.
- burneraccount12 7y ago
  Right, because the lack of DNA indexing stops cops from racial profiling now. Cops already check your ID to see if you're related to any known criminal! Literally, this "nightmare scenario" you're envisioning happens every day in America. E.g.: https://theintercept.com/2019/06/28/nypd-gang-database-additions/ https://theintercept.com/2019/06/28/nypd-gang-database-addit... It's comical that you think this is some 1984 thing that will happen if we enable DNA indexing...the fact you don't know it already does happen shows just how far removed your experience is with police from those of black and Hispanic people in America. If you're Arab flying into the country? Even worse. If anything DNA indexing would allow innocent, unaffiliated people to not have to endure the indignity of what they currently go through.
  - ggggtez 7y ago
    So... you are saying: "We can't trust police, let's give them more powers"? I think your expectations on how many crimes a DNA database would solve is vastly over-estimating. For example, even if a rape case collected DNA evidence, most of them never actually process those kits. You can't solve a crime if you never look at the evidence to begin with. I think a DNA database is a solution in search of a problem.
    - burneraccount12 7y ago
AmericanChopper 7y ago
> Plastic straws, browsing history and DNA indexing are white people problems, IMHO. I can’t imagine what it’s like to dismiss problems based on the ethnic demographics you believe they impact.
- burneraccount12 7y ago
  Sort of the way white people dismiss the problems of black people. Easily. For example: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.h...
  - AmericanChopper 7y ago
    Somebody having their own position on an issue that you believe impacts one ethnic group more than another is not racist. Having a position on an issue that is motivated by which ethnic group you believe it impacts is outright racist. I guess these days I probably shouldn’t be, but I am shocked to see openly racist rhetoric on HN.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

TurkishPoptart 7y ago

Heh, nice try, FBI.

opwieurposiu 7y ago

DNA can be synthesized for $2 a gene. DNA tests as used in crime labs only check dozens/hundreds of genes to make a match. With a database of everyone's DNA, anyone can be framed for anything. https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/synthetic-gene-cost-slashed-to-2/3008491.article https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/synthetic-gene-cost-slas...

krick 7y ago
This is interesting. But can I know ahead which genes will be tested? Is it always the same set? Basically, I'm asking: is this really true? Given a drop of your blood I can frame you today for anything plausible for under a $1000? It's kind of difficult to believe.
- bradknowles 7y ago
  Yup, it's always the same SNPs. They can only test a relatively small group of SNPs, and they chose the ones that (at the time) believed differed the most from one person to the next, so as to maximize the probability of being able to distinguish between individuals. But if you've got everyone's DNA, then you can calculate those SNPs for everyone, and then easily create kits that would allow you to frame anyone you want just by leaving behind samples of "their" DNA at the crime scene of choice.
  - Obi_Juan_Kenobi 7y ago
    DNA fingerprinting does not utilize SNPs; it uses RFLPs.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
  - krick 7y ago
    I feel like I'm asking something you already answered, but just to make sure: this implies, that to frame specifically you I don't need everyone's DNA, I just need a sample of yours, right? And if I understand correctly, DNA evidence is treated with quite a respect in court? So, if I really can make a sample of "fake DNA" (that will be indistinguishable from the "real" for forensics purposes) for a couple hundreds dollars, I really can frame anyone I know for anything (right now!), because getting a sample of their DNA isn't really that difficult. It doesn't quite add up in my head, because if it's so simple, why the courts would even consider it hard evidence?
- 7y ago

ttobbaybbob 7y ago

Such a database would certainly have been valuable to anyone who ever wanted to commit genocide. It's easy to see the short-term, first-order positive results. However the power to abuse such information is basically unlimited.

burneraccount12 7y ago
Wait, WHAT? How are people going to use a DNA database to commit genocide? How are these people going to be killed en masse? What would stop someone from using the same method without a DNA database? This argument makes no sense...the thing stopping genocide now is not the inability to identify people based on their genetic characteristics.

exolymph 7y ago

You should look up the no-due-process list of "terrorists" (some real, I grant) who have problems at airports. Then think about what governments like to do with lists of people in general.

burneraccount12 7y ago
Exactly! If we had a DNA database we could quickly clear people as innocent. Instead we rely in inaccurate authentication measures like birthdays and names and photos...hence endless suffering. DNA would positively or negatively identify people. Besides, people are already voluntarily doing this at airports as part of the CLEAR program. So your horrible awful terrible nightmare scenario...literally goes on every day at major American airports.
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  > If we had a DNA database we could quickly clear people as innocent. Only when you have a sample to compare it to that definitively came from the perpetrator (not just “was found at the scene and can indicate that whoever it came from was present”.) That's actually not all that common.
  - burneraccount12 7y ago
    Is the TSA the FBI? They're not looking for perpetrators, they're looking for terrorists. I promise you the US government has a vast database of biometric information of suspected terrorists. The fact we all have to suffer thru terrible, imperfect authentication techniques like looking at your birthday shows we should have a database to save us all the grief. Honestly all your arguments are actually GREAT reasons to have a national DNA index.

ggggtez 7y ago

I think the idea of this post is contradictory. Who suffers from government lists of potential terrorists, criminals, and their relatives? It's not a "white people" problem. That would be a problem faced primarily by dark-skinned people. And really, what else would the government do with a database of the DNA of every person in the country, other than use it to track and profile people of color? Could you imagine being "stop-and-frisked" for your DNA to see if you were related to any known criminal, and then questioned under suspicion that you might know where they are hiding? It seems simply crazy to say in one breath that government and police abuse their power, and then in the next say you want to give them authority to keep files on every single person with impunity.

burneraccount12 7y ago
Right, because the lack of DNA indexing stops cops from racial profiling now. Cops already check your ID to see if you're related to any known criminal! Literally, this "nightmare scenario" you're envisioning happens every day in America. E.g.: https://theintercept.com/2019/06/28/nypd-gang-database-additions/ https://theintercept.com/2019/06/28/nypd-gang-database-addit... It's comical that you think this is some 1984 thing that will happen if we enable DNA indexing...the fact you don't know it already does happen shows just how far removed your experience is with police from those of black and Hispanic people in America. If you're Arab flying into the country? Even worse. If anything DNA indexing would allow innocent, unaffiliated people to not have to endure the indignity of what they currently go through.
- ggggtez 7y ago
  So... you are saying: "We can't trust police, let's give them more powers"? I think your expectations on how many crimes a DNA database would solve is vastly over-estimating. For example, even if a rape case collected DNA evidence, most of them never actually process those kits. You can't solve a crime if you never look at the evidence to begin with. I think a DNA database is a solution in search of a problem.
  - burneraccount12 7y ago

AmericanChopper 7y ago

> Plastic straws, browsing history and DNA indexing are white people problems, IMHO. I can’t imagine what it’s like to dismiss problems based on the ethnic demographics you believe they impact.

burneraccount12 7y ago
Sort of the way white people dismiss the problems of black people. Easily. For example: https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.h...
- AmericanChopper 7y ago
  Somebody having their own position on an issue that you believe impacts one ethnic group more than another is not racist. Having a position on an issue that is motivated by which ethnic group you believe it impacts is outright racist. I guess these days I probably shouldn’t be, but I am shocked to see openly racist rhetoric on HN.