30 ms·

23andMe lays off 100 people as DNA test sales decline

• ZguideZ 7y ago
  Just the beginning.
• mterrel 7y ago
  I just wonder what happens to everyone's DNA data as the company faces financial trouble and/or sells itself. That's in addition to any concerns about possible security breaches that might occur.
  • LatteLazy 7y ago
    Sold to the highest bidder...
    • redisman 7y ago
      I think that's already happened and now they're out of ways to monetize further.
  • rolltiide 7y ago
    Which contributes to why sales declined. Enough people have had their awkward family gatherings after trying to have fun with a novelty gift. Enough people have watched others mess up otherwise cohesive family structures over what was supposed to be a novelty toy. Enough people have watched the availability for genetic information to go to law enforcement. And that maybe they don't need your specific information to use that effectively, so why give more whether you agree with it or disagree with it. And the uncertainty of this information being stored in perpetuity, available to the highest bidder.
    • monadic2 7y ago
      Interestingly it also got Elizabeth Warren in hot water and accused of normalizing race science by interpreting her test as proof of ethnicity.
  • Paul-ish 7y ago
    This is an important question. Ancestry, for example, has been taking on debt to pay dividends at the behest of its majority shareholder.
    • shostack 7y ago
      Source?
  • quantified 7y ago
    Not much wonder. Focus more energy on ways to monetize the DNA they have already collected?
• dragonwriter 7y ago
  > Wojcicki has theories, but she doesn’t have clear proof for why consumers are shying away from getting tests Because the ones that want them have gotten them and there's no reason to ever buy the product again once you've done it once. I mean, smartphones are great, but the market for them would have hit a wall pretty quickly if no one ever had a reason to replace them after buying their first.
  • fetus8 7y ago
    I mean, there's the fact that companies like this also provide your data to DNA databases that governments and other companies have access too. That seems like a good reason to shy away from getting their tests done.
    • t34543 7y ago
      That’s exactly why I’ll never use them.
    • Keverw 7y ago
      Yeah, who know's what happens to the data after it leaves you. I know I seen on the news the military was advising against it, I guess if your DNA was leaked in a data breach someone could create viruses that target specific people, sounds far fetched like out of a science fiction movie though so not sure how realistic but I guess in theory it could happen. But ironically, many states like California collect newborn babies blood at the hospital after birth and stores them - even selling some samples to outside researchers, which is true if you look it up but if you tell people that they think you are some conspiracy theory tinfoil hat wearing nutcase instead of doing their own research rather they just attack you, not sure if parents are even aware. Looks like they are supposed to be informed, but the state isn't sure if that happens always by the doctors or nurses at the hospital. Wouldn't surprise me if it's just a small sign on the wall somewhere no one notices. I have been wanting to though do one of those DNA tests but never got around to it since didn't want to spend the money right now and the whole privacy thing. I never knew my real dad, so I was kinda curious. Then on the other side of the family originally came from the South like Alabama or Tennessee and then before the US Germany but who knows if true just what I've been told by some family, but they very well could be wrong. I'm not sure how true or detailed those reports are either from these DNA test companies.
• Mathnerd314 7y ago
  DNA testing still isn't ready for general use, giving conflicting / arbitrary results: https://www.healthista.com/dna-genetic-test-review-three-different-diet-fitness-results/ https://www.healthista.com/dna-genetic-test-review-three-dif... I'm guessing it's the trough of disillusionment in the hype cycle, and DNA testing will suddenly get really popular in a few years.
  • itake 7y ago
    or they miss-estimated their market size and growth. I don't think most people care about DNA testing.
    • mgbmtl 7y ago
      or it's already covered by healthcare when a doctor suspects it's necessary (for genetic predispositions).
      • deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
      • epistasis 7y ago
        And there's basically zero overlap between 23andMe's test method and the clinically useful tests that a doctor would order. For example, carrier screening, to see if you and your partner both carry recessive variants that may result in a rare genetic disease in some of your children: impossible with 23andMe's setup, but useful to a huge number of couples, and already common practice for some ethnic groups.
    • _red 7y ago
      when they started, you could get your results anonymously. I recommended several friends to try. Then they changed that policy...at which point I stopped recommending it. I'm not saying this is the cause, but they had a chance to be good guys and decided against it.
• dekhn 7y ago
  I can't believe they've received three quarters of a billion dollars of investment.
  • jw887c 7y ago
    Its not surprising when you realize how bad wealth inequality has made investors searching desperately for any place to put money.
  • redis_mlc 7y ago
    "Anne Wojcicki married Google co-founder Sergey Brin in May 2007." There ya go. 23andMe was a vanity project for Sergey's wife (now ex-wife.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Wojcicki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anne_Wojcicki Same story for Marissa Mayer.
    • dekhn 7y ago
      I know quite well (have met all the people involved), but I still can't believe how much money has been sunk into them.
      • downerending 7y ago
        One of the joys of being rich is being able to spend your money however you like. It's a caution to the rest of us, though. My annual salary is just a rounding error to them, and it's not worth their time to consider my individual fate in any way.
    • dehrmann 7y ago
      Importantly, Alphabet is an inventor in 23andme. Her sister is also the head of YouTube. This still isn’t as bad as Elon Musk using Tesla to bail out his cousin’s failing Solar City.
  • wahern 7y ago
    The largest chunk, $300 million, was a buy-in from GlaxoSmithKline, with which it purchased access to the database and research. Given the slowing pace of drug development, that was probably a very good "investment" by GSK. But maybe it was a bad one for 23andMe if it limits the scope of deals they can do with other pharmaceutical companies.
• whynotkeithberg 7y ago
  I kinda wanted to get one but the privacy concerns and having my data sold/added to a government database scares me.
  • awb 7y ago
    Almost any other sensitive data (passwords, bank accounts, etc.) can be changed with enough effort, but your genetics can't. Even if you think 23&Me is operating ethically today or that you trust the laws protecting your privacy once your genetic data is leaked there's nothing you can do about it.
  • TaylorGood 7y ago
    Knowing your DNA is basically is a sell-through for these test kit companies makes this is a nonstarter for me.
• throwaway5752 7y ago
  Everyone paying attention the pattern of layoffs? Ebay, Mozilla, DigitalOcean, 23andMe, Intel... Pay down your credit card debt and make sure you have at least 6 months of expenses in the bank, if you're young and haven't been through this before.
  • bdcravens 7y ago
    Always wise. Also a good idea to remember that there are a large number of software jobs outside of big name tech.
  • jimbob45 7y ago
    Is the intuition on credit card debt just that unemployment can jeopardize your ability to make payments?
    • codezero 7y ago
      payments, and ability to even get a job if your score takes a hit... a lot of companies do credit checks before hiring :/
      • Keverw 7y ago
        Yep, depends on the state though. Can also affect your insurance rates too such as car insurance, not sure if other types of insurance use it as an indicator but wouldn't surprise me.
    • glofish 7y ago
      add to that risk the predatory nature of credit card debt, the interest is already super high, they can increase that further after a late payment, plus it stays on your record for 6 years
    • throwaway5752 7y ago
      Yes, just reduce your debt, particularly discretionary high interest ones like credit cards.
    • 7y ago
• spike021 7y ago
  Interviewed here a year or so ago. Honestly I'll admit I didn't do well technically, but every interviewer I had just seemed super impersonal and not very friendly. They asked very interrogative questions, and while I get it and am mostly ok with it, I felt like they were asking due to the existing environment they have there. I just didn't get a great vibe. Disclaimer: But again, I know I didn't do well on the technical stuff so maybe I'm biased negatively toward the experience.
  • toomuchtodo 7y ago
    This breaks my heart to hear. I interviewed there in 2011 as an infra guy, and not only was the infra team personable (the winning question was rapidly identifying the symptoms of a duplex mismatch on a switch ethernet port), the VP of Engineering was awesome as well. He even went so far as to say, "As a tech person, you belong out here in the Bay, even if it's not with us". I turned down the offer, but it was one of the best interview experiences I've ever had.
    • spike021 7y ago
      Well, like I said, could just be that my perspective was tainted a bit by not doing as well as I'd have liked. But I think sometimes these things just happen too. I think I interviewed in 2018, so that'd be 7 years after you did. I'm sure a lot changes in that much time.
      • ThrowawayH4MCb 7y ago
        A bunch of engineering directors were brought in from external sources a few years back, and that really changed the atmosphere. Before then, we seemed to try to hire smart engineers and give them independence to solve problems. Those new directors lowered the hiring bars to grow their teams, and the culture got way more rigid and corporate.
        • spike021 7y ago
          That's too bad. Sounds fairly normal for companies around here, though. Also, I guess I offended some ex or current employees since I've gotten the downvote brigade. :\
• LatteLazy 7y ago
  Probably a good thing. Since they started cooperating with law enforcement, it's basically a giant exercise is entrapment with a little psudo science to help sell it...
  • smt88 7y ago
    Do you have any examples of this? From what I've read, they've found criminals using relatives' DNA test data, but that wasn't the evidence used to convict.
• dmix 7y ago
  Maybe the industry as a whole should stop handing stuff over to law enforcement and governments. I was going to buy it for 2 different people for christmas but both declined over privacy concerns as they read in the news they are being used in sweeping investigations. Given the number of wrongful accusations that litter history and the general trend away from any regard for privacy among security agencies this is a very legitimate concern, even for regular folks like my parents.
  • skissane 7y ago
    > Maybe the industry as a whole should stop handing stuff over to law enforcement and governments. They can try saying "No", then the government will just get a court order to force them to do it. They don't really have a choice in the end – the only choice they have is whether they make it easy for the government ("you want our data? here have it!") or slightly harder ("I'll need to see a warrant first..." "No problem, we are going to the magistrate right now to get one...")
    • mplewis 7y ago
      Companies could stop retaining data that governments would be interested in. I'd love to get my genome sequenced, but I never want that data to be retained by anyone but me.
      • outworlder 7y ago
        Until they get ordered to retain that data.
        • chopin 7y ago
          But they aren't now. The only reason for keeping data is for their own benefit.
    • madisfun 7y ago
      The companies like 23andMe can do anonymous tests. They can even sell "gift cards" for cash (or bitcoin, for digitally inclined). Don't deliver kits, let them be picked up without asking for an ID, just by the gift card number. As long as the test results are not linked to a specific address or name, it's fine. They will still have clues about the state and the city and the IP address of the person. It's enough to do whatever research they may want to do with aggregate data. It's not good enough to sell this data to insurance companies and advertisers.
• ThrowawayH4MCb 7y ago
  Current, unaffected employee here. Throwaway for obvious reasons. A big chunk of the layoff is the new lab that we built in Phoenix. That only made economic sense in the scenario where we were selling far more kits than we succeeded in selling. The rest of the layoffs have a similar root cause: a massive overestimate of how much we were going to sell. I'd blame the shortfall on some combination of growing privacy concerns from customers, failure to understand the demand elasticity as we cut back on discounts, maybe some slowing of consumer discretionary spending, and maybe saturating the market.
  • ilamont 7y ago
    Ancestry.com has also stepped up its marketing game. Used to be a follower with DNA, now a leader, and discounting heavily. And, unlike 23andMe which got rid of family tree tools used by genealogists, Ancestry still has a very strong suite of trees and traditional genealogy tools. Some people really want to have both genetic and traditional genealogy accounts under the same provider, and are either unaware or don't really care about the privacy concerns.
    • fiftyfifty 7y ago
      One thing I would add is the data for places outside of Europe looks pretty weak for both Ancestry.com and 23AndMe, at least it was the last time I looked. If you are from European descent they can practically tell you what village your ancestors are from (how accurate that is I don't know) but if you are Asian about the best you get is yep, you're Asian! I married into an Asian family and the reports I've seen from Asian family members are pretty disappointing compared to what I've seen from my family members (white, European descent). I imagine it's similar for some other non-white races too, that's a big demographic that's being missed.
      • rb808 7y ago
        Lol $199 - yup you're Asian. Thanks!
      • sombremesa 7y ago
• AviationAtom 7y ago
  That's what they get for only allowing people to pay their way into their ecosystem via a test kit. Their service would much more useful if they had a larger database of people, but only so many people that have already done a kit through Ancestry DNA are willing to pay for yet another DNA kit through 23andMe to get access to their database of people,a s they already have access to Ancestry's larger database. More or less 23andMe is starting to hit saturation and need to build their database more if they want to increase usage of their service, get more time on site, and thereby draw existing users towards their current and future monetized offerings. There was one time in there history that they allowed you to import your DNA data for free from other services, but they shut that down long ago. They are going to face more competition in their once-unique area of DNA health data, as Promethease was just acquired by MyHeritage.
• yalogin 7y ago
  This is a functionality that no one asked for. Why does one need them? Let me ask an extreme question, how different is this from me naming a star after someone for their birthday? I go to some site and print out a certificate that that particular star in a given galaxy is now named Michael. Point is its a novelty thing. If a doctor asks me to get it done for a medical reason, sure. Other wise this is just a curiosity with no use. Also, one way to look at it is we are paying to make our DNAs sellable to third parties. These have value for a long long time and the company is going to make money on that for ever. Sure there will "anonymization" of the DNA or some other privacy blurb used but we all know it will be sold.
  • zamadatix 7y ago
    Knowing your genetic risks would be useful, it's just a shame their share the data with 3rd parties.
  • pivo 7y ago
    > this is just a curiosity with no use Small sample size, but I was adopted and didn't know my genetic background or have any family medical history. When I've been ill I hadn't been able to provide that medical information when the doctors requested it. Thanks to 23andMe I not only know a lot more about myself, but I also found my biological parents who are married to each other and wonderful, and who have two twin sons. So suddenly I have a second set of parents, two full brothers, and three more nieces and nephews and they're all incredibly welcoming, great people who I visit often. So I'm very happy that 23andMe exists.
    • yalogin 7y ago
      Sure. Like I said the argument I put forth was an extreme one, intentionally.
  • epistasis 7y ago
    23andMe is very open about selling people's data! More people are OK with this than you would think. And without those data sales to third parties, 23andMe would look very different. I hear (rumors only) that their customer acquisition cost is a large percentage of the kit cost, and what's left over could in no way cover running the SNP chip. The 23andMe SNP chip is not very medically useful, and I can't imagine a doctor recommending anyone use 23andMe unless it's to find relatives to relieve stress about the matter. Doctors will order specialized tests from clinically vetted firms that have medical directors signing reports that put their medical licenses on the line. All that said, giving people access to their own data is somewhat valuable; and when the company was started no one knew how valuable it would be. Turns out it's mostly only useful for genealogy, at the moment, and unlikely to be useful for much more to individuals. What people really want to know can not be answered by these tests, for example, what foods a person should eat, how long they will live, what they need to do in order to finally find bliss, etc... There are a several tiny, shady, providers of this information that is in high demand by some consumers, but short supply from the science.
• natch 7y ago
  >Wojcicki has theories I have a theory for her. It's too expensive. It was really cheap when I got it (on deep discount) but there are discounts, and then there are discounts. The discounts in the last few years have been very weak. For the past few years I would have bought it for as many as five family members if only it had gone back to the price I got it for. And now that the privacy concerns have understandably scared everyone, maybe privacy has overtaken that theory. But the prices are still too high for the value offered.
  • thrower123 7y ago
    I saw one of the kits on sale in Rite-Aid the other day, and I looked at it, and it was only like $35 dollars. That's down in the "sure, what the hell, maybe it'd be interesting" range. Then I looked closer, and realized that in the fine print that was just for the testing kit. When you send it in and get it processed, there was an additional $99-150ish lab processing fee, depending on what you picked, to actually get the results back. A little rich for my blood at that price.
• uwuhn 7y ago
  This isn't their first round of large layoffs.
• natch 7y ago
  The genetic predisposition stuff has been underwhelming. I'm going to just make up an example, so keep in mind that I openly told you this is made up. Basically they put things in alarming terms. For example, after clicking through some confirmations that you are OK with learning the information, you might encounter things like: "You have an elevated predisposition to Snooferitis, with a 50% higher risk than average." And 50% sounds really scary, the way they put it. Then when you drill into it you see that the general population has a 0.2% risk of developing Snooferitis, and your risk is 0.3%, so that is, wow, elevated. ymmv. There are definitely cases where things are more cut and dry (and possibly very not good) and sometimes the click-through confirmations about wanting to learn the information are seriously justified. But a lot of the elevated risk information just feels like fluff.
• jsgo 7y ago
  > Wojcicki has theories Think the obvious one is that the results are shared and whether someone is a criminal or not (or will be one in the future), people are not particularly comfortable with sharing to parties they didn't initially trust it to for the purposes they trusted it for. Anecdotally, I bought a 23andme kit (just the genealogy one) but never submitted it because the labeling was to send it to the lab in the next town that manages the company I work for's drug screenings. Well, I don't think I have any pre-existing conditions and certainly don't do drugs, but I don't know about any unknowns on the health side that could impact my insurance if they were to share it to the company. Forget that.
  • mc32 7y ago
    Exactly. Many people naively thought that it was going to be positive. Build your family tree, get better ancestry information. Even finding family relations can be fraught with issues like illegitimate children, sperm donors who thought they’d remain anonymous, secret affairs now outed and then there is the other health data aspect...
    • reaperducer 7y ago
      On CBS Sunday Morning this past weekend Steve Hartman had a piece about a 23andMe-style test let him know his parents weren't his parents and his family tree is actually a shrub that grew on the wrong side of the tracks. Being Steve, the story was told in an awww, shucks Ron Howard style with a happy ending, but I found it kind of disturbing.
    • tropo 7y ago
      Some of those are evil secrets. Cheaters ought to be exposed. Living a lie is a terrible way to live.
      • irrational 7y ago
        Yeah, I don't feel at all bad about cheaters being exposed. But, children that result from that cheating... if you grew up thinking that your dad is your dad and then find out from a dna test that he isn't, that can really shake a person. And it's not from anything the child had any control over.
• avocado4 7y ago
  23andme testing is one and done. Once you've had it you will never spend a dime with them. It's a red flag for any investor.
  • fiftyfifty 7y ago
    It's worse than that, I talked my parents into doing one of these tests, now I don't ever have to pay for one.
  • Barrin92 7y ago
    also, the value you get out of it seemed to be mostly curiosity and novelty. Getting a bunch of stats on your heritage is nice and all but it's not any sort of ground-breaking consumer service.
  • PunchTornado 7y ago
    their data could be very valuable depending on the evolution of personal medicine.
    • avocado4 7y ago
      That was probably the justification for a high valuation. Also explains the recent pharma pivot.
    • nradov 7y ago
      Their existing data can't really be used for personalized medicine. If they want to pursue that market they'll need different testing protocols and additional regulatory approvals.
      • PunchTornado 7y ago
        regulatory approval is easy to get with the right kind of lobbying. i would say assays are useful for personal medicine. they get about 6m variants.
  • OrgNet 7y ago
    They could charge you a monthly fee to keep you up to date on discoveries in this field relating to your personal DNA? (not sure how often this actually happens....)
• peter303 7y ago
  A siblings results was enough for me. We share the same ancestry. There were no surprises in their result.
• marcell 7y ago
  They sold 10M kits, and they primarily market in the US. DNA never changes, so you have a lifetime max of 1 purchase of 23andMe per lifetime. Their competitors have likely sold 15-30M as well, so maybe 30-40M of these kits have been sold. That's 10% of US market. What's the max conceivable penetration here? 20%?
  • tootie 7y ago
    It's a bit of novelty act right now. Like I know pretty well what my ancestry is and it isn't terribly relevant to my daily life as-is. If these guys told me I was actually part Cherokee or something unexpected, I'd shrug and continue doing what I'm doing.
  • rfc 7y ago
    Your germ line genome rarely changes. Your exome changes all the time. Your gut biome changes all the time. There's massive market opportunity but a ton of regulations around how to tap into that market opportunity. On a separate note, Ancestry is going through a similar issue. They've had double digit revenue declines in their DNA testing suite. The truth around 23andMe and Ancestry is that they're really doing a super shallow sequencing and, I believe, are doing only genotyping. It's not super interesting in the long run because it's such a static dataset. Getting to exomic or metabolic/gut biome sequencing provides much more interesting insights into the human body.
    • inetknght 7y ago
      > Your exome changes all the time. I work in DNA analysis (not for 23andme). Citation needed. > Your gut biome changes all the time. Your gut biome isn't being tested by a genetics company collecting your saliva or epithelial cells.
      • calf 7y ago
        How complete are theses tests? If I wait another 10, 15 years to get sequenced, would I get more accurate, reliable information? Can advances in sequencing technology make it worth people to get resampled? Or is it just an issue of better analysis?
• titzer 7y ago
  “This has been slow and painful for us,” I'm gonna give you some slack here, Anne, but TBH Silicon Valley executives don't really understand what these words mean. “I think the tech world needs to own this[sic] better communicate privacy standards to build trust,” she said. “I want to jump in and really own it.” Or maybe instead of jumping in with your billionaire executive pants on, Anne, you could listen. People are sick of being told what's being done to them. You didn't miscommunicate, you screwed up. People are pissed off.
• rglover 7y ago
  Surprised they haven't expanded the offering to include regular blood panels and "doctor's recommendations" (subscription revenue). Hell, you could even do a "improve your bloodline" service that plainly explains how doing a, b, and c will help with that and set you on a life plan w/ decade-level health targets. I'd have to imagine a well-packaged, boutique option for getting that done would be huge (and they'd have most of the infrastructure and relationships to do it). If it was affordable I'd buy it.
• hbosch 7y ago
  I didn’t buy a test, because my brother did. Why pay $100 to get the same story twice?
  • cmauniada 7y ago
    Although it would be funny if your results were different than your brother's.
  • neivin 7y ago
    I didn't buy the test because all it would say would be "Congrats! You are 100% asian." I feel like 23&me is literally only useful/interesting to white people because they can see which one of the 50 European countries they have ties to. It's not that useful for me. I've had friends do it and get 99.97% Chinese or Indian. Amazing, I could have told you that for free.
    • some-guy 7y ago
      As a 3rd generation white person in the US, what specific European ancestry I have is meaningless to me. I find the health tests to be more interesting than the ancestry, though it was a bit scary though having to click through all the warnings to get to the results.
      • jamesrcole 7y ago
        > what specific [ancestry] I have is meaningless to me. it's ultimately probably not important, but I would think that it's at least something to be curious about.
    • jamesrcole 7y ago
      > I feel like 23&me is literally only useful/interesting to white people because they can see which one of the 50 European countries they have ties to. I'm not familiar with the kinds of ancestry information they can provide, but why would that only apply to white people? Why not also, say, people with African heritage and which of the African countries they have ties to?
  • 7y ago
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• kemyd 7y ago
  Did anyone learn anything meaningful from these tests? I saw some results, for example, "I'm 3% Syrian, 10% Portugal, 8% Korean ...." etc., but do they provide more important results like "Sorry, you will have cancer in 2 years"?
  • rantwasp 7y ago
    yes + you can actually download the raw data and analyze it with a couple of other online tools (e.g. https://www.promethease.com https://www.promethease.com). It may be worth it especially if you have a rare disease - but you'll have to be the judge of that
    • throwaway2048 7y ago
      So even more people get your data, horay
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• SubiculumCode 7y ago
  Competition + Novelty Factor Decline + Privacy Concerns + Not that much benefit + DNA doesn't change so no need to test more than once: Hard upper limit in sales.
• kevinstubbs 7y ago
  Very curious that this came just a couple weeks after they announced licensing their first drug compound (using data from the test kits?) to the Spanish firm Almirall [0,1]. Anybody have any ideas about this? Why would they slow down the "growth and scaling efforts" (as the cnbc article claims) even despite lower-than expected sales, when the data from kits is what gives them the unique(?) capability to discover novel drug compounds at a massively reduced cost compared to traditional pharma companies. [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-09/23andme-licenses-drug-compound-to-spanish-drugmaker-almirall https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-09/23andme-l... [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22004326 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22004326
  • ThrowawayH4MCb 7y ago
    Bringing drugs to market requires a lot of money. And the whole process takes a long time (order of a decade). Subsidizing the tests or doing more marketing would sell more tests, but wouldn't speed up drug development. And doing so would burn up money that could be used for drug development. And even though the licensing deal is promising, there has been no drug brought to market yet based on 23andMe's data. So it's a hard sell to investors.
• blackswan101 7y ago
  Lots of layoffs happening recently: 23andme, stubhub, tripadvisor etc. Early indicators of a tech bubble?
  • jacquesm 7y ago
    No, just crap companies that you don't really need. Companies that have products with actual users rather than novelty items or pure convenience will be around for a long long time because they are profitable.
  • rowathray 7y ago
    Saw an analysis of game sales on Steam for 2019 recently. Way, way down compared to 2018. Yeah, sure, it could be everybody is busy working, but it didn't look good.
  • zelly 7y ago
    Since it's happening without the greater economy collapsing, it's actually bullish. The market cleans house sometimes and comes out stronger.
  • heavyset_go 7y ago
    Consumers have less purchasing power each year that goes by. I wouldn't bet my career on consumer tech in the long run.
  • blihp 7y ago
    While it's more pronounced in tech, it's not just tech. Lots of old economy companies tightening their belts as well based on anecdotal stories I've been hearing in the last year.
• resters 7y ago
  why would anyone sign up for a service that will link anyone in their family to law enforcement DNA tracking databases? I’m a customer already but now that I know how non-private the identity data is, I would not do so again.
• joshfraser 7y ago
  I did it and then regretted it. Possible outcomes: You risk getting linked to a crime because your DNA was found at the scene of the crime. You might even be innocent, but just having your DNA in a database increases your risk of a false conviction. Worse, you put your relatives at risk too, regardless of whether they are guilty or not. Maybe you unknowingly got someone pregnant and now owe child support. Depending on your situation, you may not welcome this discovery. Best case, you find out that you have a genetic disease that you can't do much about.
• killjoywashere 7y ago
  The real risk in my mind is that this opens market space for Beijing-backed companies like Novogene in Sacramento. They will occupy that space and every adjacent space as fast as they can. They'll sequence your tumor genetics, or your germline to get a better read on you're kid's inherited disease. And you'll never know it because your doctor contracted with them, they signed a BAA (so it's all legal, right). And then Novogene will take that BAA to the bathroom, piss on it, and send your genome to China for cross-referencing in Face++ and see if you have any Uigher in you. Everyone will eventually get some amount of sequencing done, probably multiple times throughout their lives. The vastly more important question in my mind is who's going to do it, and what are their incentives? With cost-conscious medical professionals, you can bet it will be the lowest bidder, and the lowest bidder will not have your best interests in mind.
  • Aperocky 7y ago
    This is true, however, please note that nobody except maybe your family will have your best interest in mind.
    • killjoywashere 7y ago
      Some motives are more aligned than others. https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Research/US-China%20Biotech%20Report.pdf https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Research/US-China%2...
  • chii 7y ago
    this is why there needs to be laws about using and transferring information about you (biological or not). Regulation, and transparency prevents abuses. If your sample was tested for trace genetic traits you didn't ask for, you have avenues to pursue if laws exists, but right now no such avenues are available.
  • hyperbovine 7y ago
    This wild, unfounded fantasy completely misses the point: genetic privacy is fundamentally unlike other types of private information. It is trivially easy for someone to collect your genetic information if they really want to, completely legally and without your consent. They could, for example, obtain bits of the multitude of genetic material you spread around your environment simply by existing -- chewing gum, hair, cigarette butts, poop. Or, just look at a few close relatives of yours who overshared everything on some online database. And these are just the obvious ways.
• Trias11 7y ago
  Stop monetizing me without compensating me. Stop [ab]using me without my concent. Be forthcoming and willing to establish win-win relationship with me instead of sneaking out my stuff and monetizing my stuff without disclosing what are you doing with my stuff and without compensating me.
  • rainyMammoth 7y ago
    In this case you paid (199$!) for the privilege of having your data monetized.
• JacobAldridge 7y ago
  I happily share my income and net worth figures online, post here and everywhere using my real name, and I’m even doing a podcast now sharing all the gory details of going through fertility treatment from the male perspective. There’s no way in the world I would allow a company, or any other person or entity, to voluntarily have my DNA.
  • pas 7y ago
    If it could be bought somewhere with only a big QR code one it and prepaid stamped envelope, I might buy it abroad, spit into it, seal it, send it and check results over Tor later.
    • rantwasp 7y ago
      you can buy it on Amazon or I also saw the kits at Target - pay with cash if extra paranoid. use a vpn, don't give your real name or real address. it's some work but it's doable if you want to.
• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• joshspankit 7y ago
  I know this has been essentially stated already, but: DUH. The moment they let anyone have access to that information, they soured the market. The “least morally questionable” risk is accidentally handing distant cousins over to police, and most people aren’t even comfortable with that.
• blisterpeanuts 7y ago
  The ultimate solution to privacy concerns is home sequencing machines. When we can sequence our own DNA, we can upload it anonymously and get many of the benefits. The one thing that wouldn't work is finding lost relatives by name. Maybe general location, though.
• abootstrapper 7y ago
  Noticing a lot of layoffs recently.
• jellicle 7y ago
  I was interested in DNA analysis until I realized that doing so meant giving my info to law enforcement and to all the world's corporations who would use that info against my interests, and it couldn't be undone. I would probably still be interested if there were a company that promised never to share ANYTHING with anybody and to destroy every trace of my info and sample within 90 days. But that company isn't 23andme, for sure.
• yellow_lead 7y ago
  My company has some workplace goals, that if you complete them, you can have some extra time off. Usually they involve taking care of your body and participation is tracked by the honor system. A recent one had a requirement that was a DNA test "to learn about your heritage." There was an opt out, which I took for privacy reasons. I'm amazed people are just starting to realize the implications of giving away your DNA to be collected in a central database.
• ryeguy_24 7y ago
  I received Ancestry DNA as a gift this year and have no desire to use it. After reading the terms and conditions, I was amazed by how much they can share or resell the data. Beyond the privacy issue, I'm also not sure how much these services can add value to my life. Either knowing or not knowing where some of my 2^n ancestors (n being generations from me) are potentially (based on proxy information, not certain) originating from doesn't seem to do much for me. Also, knowing health risks also doesn't do a whole lot for me as I already live a healthy life with the idea that living healthily will add years to my life. Do I want to know I'm predisposed to some disease in the future? Not really. Unless there are DNA-tailored pills you can take that reverse any potential DNA-driven issues coming my way, I'd rather not know. Does anyone feel differently? Are they getting value from these services?
• prepend 7y ago
  I did this almost 8 years ago for the health insights and recommended it to a few dozen friends and family because the UI was nice, they added new reports, and they were the only low cost provider at the time that let me export my data. I loved the service and found an unknown sibling through the site. The FDA made them remove health insights so that made the service less useful. But two years ago they started selling data to pharmaceuticals. They claim it is opt in, but I have a hard time believing them. And they prompt me to opt in about once a month. I no longer recommend.
  • riversflow 7y ago
    I’m curious for the reasoning behind why selling the data to big pharma is a bad thing? I was thrilled to hear about that personally as I am very supportive of large pools of genetic data being harnessed for drug research. Big pharma has big money and lots of smart folks, if they can leverage 23&me’s data to create better drugs or find the root cause behind diseases, it seems like a win to me. That said, I hope that we pass stronger laws protecting genetic data from being used for any type of insurance. Genetics =/= genetic expression, and the law should reflect that.
    • prepend 7y ago
      I don’t like my data used without consent. I don’t like my data passing through extra companies forever and dna is or will be always identifiable since it’s like, my dna. I also don’t like the idea of companies making money off my data without compensating me.
  • wutbrodo 7y ago
    > The FDA made them remove health insights so that made the service less useful. I believe there are third-party sites that will still give you this information if you upload your raw data. Though of course, this has the downside of giving yet another party access to your data.
    • ryanmercer 7y ago
      The 3rd party sites I've used don't ask for any identifying information though (unless you want to pay for paid features), it wouldn't surprise me if there were simply downloaded freeware that you could use to do it offline on a virtual machine if you even wanted. A quick Google query leads me to this >I recently wrote a small tool, Snappy, that can help you browse and interpret your raw data. Written in JavaScript, all processing is done on your browser, without transmitting sensitive data to any server. That also enables the tool to be used offline https://www.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/6troyj/wrote_a_new_tool_that_helps_you_browse_your_data/ https://www.reddit.com/r/23andme/comments/6troyj/wrote_a_new... So it does appear there are some sort of offline solutions for further exploring your raw data.
• Gatsky 7y ago
  I’m surprised that 23andMe have not released any new products since they started. They still offer the same SNP chip based test fundamentally. The interpretation of results has if anything become less interesting due to regulation. It may be that there aren’t any new products that are either useful or that people want. But still, it highlights the type of company they want to be, a kind of genomics facebook.
• highprofittrade 7y ago
  If one of my siblings does a dna ancentrial test why would I need to do it???
• remmargorp64 7y ago
  I regret doing my 23andMe testing. I stopped trusting them when I realized how easy it would be for bad actors to abuse the system. I wish I could take it back and have them destroy the records and DNA sample but they literally won't let people do that (for some completely bullshit "legal" reason that makes no sense and is clearly a lie).
  • dsd 7y ago
    Where I work in the healthcare area, we are trying to expand from the us into Europe. And interesting legal question is how to honor Europe's right-to-be-forgotten laws with the US's HIPPA requirement to preserve health care data for X years. As an employee it also feels awkward.
• brownbat 7y ago
  This was way more appealing to me when they were able to provide (probably spurious) medical predictions, and before it was clear that the ancient ancestry assessments were so much guesswork. The cost of sequencing keeps rapidly halving, but the price of kits isn't really dropping, so over time it seems like less and less of a good value. They're clearly spending on social features and development, which is understandable, but it'd be interesting to see an alternate universe firm just dedicated to making sequencing as accessible a commodity as possible--send in butterflies or dog hair or sushi and we'll send you a genome. Might create interesting opportunities for amateur biology, similar to how popular amateur astronomy has become with home telescopes and ability to search Hubble images and such.
• hyperpallium 7y ago
  Wasn't the cost of sequencing supposed to be decreasing exponentially, so we'd be able to purchase a home sequencer by now, that doesn't sell your dna.
• blackrock 7y ago
  That’s what happens when bad press about your company comes out, and you’re too clueless to recognize it. Why do I really care about other people with similar genetics to me? This seems to be a greater risk for me, if I put myself into that database. And if someone else has a similar genetic as mine, and they commit a crime, then I’m automatically roped in as well. Do I really want the police knocking down my door, and slamming me to the ground, while they barge into my house with assault rifles and ballistic protection gear, and pointing their guns at every member of my family. This is a case of mistaken identity. But their m.o. is to shoot first, and ask questions later. No thanks! This is the Law of Unintended Consequences at play here. And for all the talk about cross linking your genome with others to find markers to get clues on how to cure diseases, well, I never really bought into that. It may help, but I really don’t care. The disease problem will need to be solved in another way, that doesn’t involve the compromise of my security, however remote it may be.
  • hkai 7y ago
    I think most ordinary consumers like your mom and dad don't care about privacy. I know at least two DNA companies that send your data to China for processing and yet nobody cares. So it may not be the reason of 23andme's problems - it might be just that the market is saturated. People who wanted to take the test, like me, already did it.
    • blackrock 7y ago
      I disagree. My parents paid to not have their names and phone number listed in the white pages. So they cared about some semblance of privacy, as it existed back then. This age of Google and search engines, where anything and everything is captured digitally, and will last forever, is creepy as fuck. It’s no longer even about your social media profile anymore. Or of the curated pictures that you post online to share with your friends. It’s all about your browsing history now. Your clicks, your mouse movements, your GPS location, your iPhone battery meter, your voice as you wake up. Everything, just to build some profile on you, either now, or in the future, because that data is all there, just waiting to be harvested. This dystopian nightmare that we now live in, is like some prison that we are born into, and which we don’t even know exists. It’s all around us, and monitoring us, and continuously profiling us. And it has one and only one goal: To turn us into a penny. Or a coppertop.
• aforty 7y ago
  Next step: sell all the DNA results to the highest bidder.
• rainyMammoth 7y ago
  I said this here before but 23AndMe is linked to Google in multiple ways. (Search the CEO name) You should be out of your mind to PAY to give them your most precious private data! I'm very happy to see their sale decline even though I'm quite sure that the average consumer still doesn't care about privacy.
• tomThom 7y ago
  Elections are coming and as they get closer 4chan population will increase. The margin of Trump's victory would decide their fate. I don't know if it's funny or sad that people think their ancestry defines their actions.
• darwinreally 7y ago
  I've not seen them offering their product in big markets like China or India. How can they give up before even trying?
• j45 7y ago
  Alternative DNA testing products are also superior (do more tests for less $)
• alister 7y ago
  > The company raised ample venture capital -- $786 million, according to Crunchbase If I might go on a tangent, isn't that an insane amount of money for the VCs to hand out? Apple with a $1 trillion market capitalization (the most valuable company on Earth until Saudi Aramco beat the record a month ago) began with $1M in inflation-adjusted venture funding in 1977. Is there any way that $786M makes sense or is there just too much VC money sloshing around?
  • busymom0 7y ago
    Could it be that there are a lot more VCs, especially in tech field now a days than in 1977?
• stiray 7y ago
  Has anyone read their "research consent"? https://www.23andme.com/en-int/about/consent/ https://www.23andme.com/en-int/about/consent/ "If your data are associated with your identity, they may be made public or released to insurance companies, which could have a negative effect on your ability to obtain insurance coverage." This is about data breach but within, they acknowlidge the potential usability of those data for insurance bussiness. I wonder who would buy them if they go down...
  • shostack 7y ago
    Is there any way to prevent them from using it for that purpose or to determine if my insurance company has access and is using it?
    • stiray 7y ago
      If you are in EU you can send them GDPR request, for who are they sharing with and request for deletion. For states, i doubt you have any choice.
• dgzl 7y ago
  I was very close to buying this a few years ago and I decided against it. Then later it was revealed that these companies give away and sell your data... How surprising. Now I'm too creeped out to care.
• billpg 7y ago
  I did the Ancestry DNA test. One thing I thought about when deciding to take the test or not, was what if this test exposes some Jewish ancestry and that information is discovered by fascists. I considered that a low risk because I've posted enough anti-Brexit stuff that I'm probably on some fascist's list of enemies-of-the-people already.
• lm28469 7y ago
  > DNA test sales decline Well, there are only so many people interested in the product (ie. not creeped by it), and they're only going to use it once... 2010s will be remember as the "wonky startup" decade, between this, theranos, uber &co.
• Aissen 7y ago
  Are there any similar tests but focused on privacy ? No online database entry, just your plain raw data. Use your own software or local statical models to look for pre-conditions, etc. No looking for family members, unless I want to upload my data to some website, and then be able to have it removed at any time.
• andy_ppp 7y ago
  Hang on, haven’t they just signed a deal with a drug company worth $$$? You’d think there would be hundreds of ways to monetise the types of people who have signed up for their platform...
  • ThrowawayH4MCb 7y ago
    There are. The people laid off didn't significantly contribute to that work, however.
• SQL2219 7y ago
  How DNA Transfer Framed Lukis Anderson for Murder https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16903330 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16903330
• code4tee 7y ago
  This DNA testing stuff intrigues me but there’s too much shady stuff going on with the data afterwards for me to want to give it a go. A lot of this “consumer grade” DNA testing may go down in history as a great product foiled by doing shortsighted dumb stuff with people’s data.
• auiya 7y ago
  Probably because repeat sales in this market are non-existent? At some point you hit a plateau in demand.
• thrownaway954 7y ago
  It kills me to think that they don't realize that their business is a fad and like all fads they fizzle out. couple with the fact that i'm almost certain they will share their information with anyone who is willing to pay them for it and you've got yourself a sinking ship.
• stjohnswarts 7y ago
  Probably the people who wanted to have it done have done it. Others who are skeptical or uninterested were never going to do it.
• 0xcraft 7y ago
  After a woman reached out to me on Facebook last Father's Day I took the 23andme test. Yes I had a new to me baby sister! She found me after taking the test herself looking for her (our) paternal linneage. A not too distant common relative did the 23andme too and a little detective work in online obituaries was all she needed to find me. Strangest FB message I have gotten to date. I thought she was a cybersecurity recruiter as I noticed she was looking at my LinkedIn profile a few days prior to contact. I used to be more concerned about the privacy implications. Maybe it's my age or something but I feel at peace with my choice. Besides I realized once one somewhat close relative is in the database it takes very little to link us all up. Was it worth it all things considered? For me it was though without the desire to confirm our relationship I probably wouldn't have done it.
• RedComet 7y ago
  Privacy is the reason I've never sent them my spit.