3 ms·

I don't want to belabor a secondary point too much here. But I will add there's a big difference between feeling guilty for being wrong and feeling guilty for l

• throwanem 7y ago
  I agree she isn't a liar. She was lied to, by 23andMe, and that's an important difference. I don't doubt that the company's fine print attempts to disclaim all responsibility for whatever errors they make in their calls, no matter how glaring; I'm quite confident that 23andMe could claim someone's ancestry is 97% derived from thoroughbred horses, and if pressed on the obviously nonsense result, they'd refer to their legal boilerplate and claim that the fault lay with whoever was credulous and foolish enough to presume they provide a product of merchantable quality in exchange for the fee that they charge. What I don't see is why anyone needs to take them seriously in the attempt. And, as other commenters have pointed out, when we have companies in the same industry attempting to market genetic analysis for purposes from skin care to law enforcement, it's very much worth pausing for a moment, just to make sure that we aren't at risk of accidentally reinventing the justly discredited pseudoscience of eugenics, a century down the line.
• vanderZwan 7y ago
  If this is an irrelevant point according to you, then don't bring it up as if it somehow is extra evidence that the overall thesis of the article is incorrect.
  • dave_b 7y ago
    He didn’t say it’s irrelevant, he said it’s secondary. And he didn’t argue that the overall thesis of the article is incorrect, he argued that it did a bad job of addressing the topic.