5 ms·

Stunning naivete on display here

by slimed 7y ago

ewoodrich 7y ago
How so? They point out the difficulty balancing personal privacy and tools to identify criminals who have evaded justice. Just because you don't agree with the relative importance placed on either side doesn't make them dumb or naive.
- CaptainZapp 7y ago
  What makes you naive is if you put any smidegeon of hope into the fact that insurance companies will not hesitate to buy and abuse such data to fuck you over left, right and central then you really are beyond help. If you want to risk that, fine. But you're also screwing all your relatives in the same swell process. And that's not only naive and dumb, that's totally reckless.
  - kalleboo 7y ago
    The solution to that is to abolish or neuter your insurance companies like the us in the rest of the world did. The fact that a private for-profit company decides if you live or die is absurd.
    - TeMPOraL 7y ago
      Last I checked, medical and life insurance is a thing everywhere else in the world as well. While a public healthcare system will pay for your treatment, it will not pay for the loss of earnings/business during your stay in the hospital and convalescence, nor will it pay you if you end up with a permanent disability (social security may cover a pittance of the latter).
      - kalleboo 7y ago
        That's why I also stuck the word "neuter" in there. It's not difficult to regulate what insurance companies are allowed to consider. Data brokerage can also be regulated (the GDPR would not allow 23andme to sell genetic data to insurance companies without strict opt-in)
        CaptainZapp 7y ago
        the GDPR would not allow 23andme to sell genetic data to insurance companies without strict opt-in That's true. But there's a different issue and the very reason why I would never do such testing. An insurance company cannot enforce a genetic test on you in order to write a policy. What they can and will do, however, is ask you in the questionaire for such a policy if you did a genetic test and if yes they would oblige you to share the results before writing a policy. The problem here is you can't lie. If you did a test and you deny it and it's proven later that you lied the insurance will refuse coverage. So it's in your best interest not to get tested at all. My understanding is that it's very different in the US. Such data is insanely valuable to insurers and that directly translates to the prices they're willing to pay for it. Unethical? Sure as hell. Illegal? Probably not without a strong legal framework.
      - CaptainZapp 7y ago
        it will not pay for the loss of earnings/business during your stay in the hospital and convalescence I can't speak for other countries in Europe. But in Switzerland you have mandatory coverage from your employer. The employer will pay your salary for a certain amount of time. After that insurance will kick in and pay (usually) 80% for up to a couple of years. After that invalidity insurance kicks in. That's usually about 60% of your salary until retirement. You can buy added coverage to raise those percentages. Bankrupcy for medical reasons is pretty much unheard of herearound.
    - syshum 7y ago
      >>The fact that a private for-profit company decides if you live or die is absurd. Yes it is much better when corupt government bureaucrats do that ::Rolleyes::
      - JshWright 7y ago
        I think the level of "corrupt" is up for some debate, but it's pretty inarguable that the US pays substantially more for a system that is objectively worse in many ways. So your sarcastic comment is actually correct...
        syshum 7y ago
        the US Healthcare system is second to none in the world. The actual CARE people in the US get is the best in the world, wealthy people from every nation come here to get their care It is fucking expensive and has issues with how we go about paying for it largely do to government regulations and interference in the market place But the actual care... No that is not "objectively worse" to any country anywhere, our health care is the best. People often confuse care with insurance, our Insurance system sucks largely do to government
        dragonwriter 7y ago
        >the US Healthcare system is second to none in the world 77th or so maybe to some, but definitely not second to anything, sure. > The actual CARE people in the US get is the best in the world, No, it's not consistently. The care a very small fraction get is, perhaps. But even for most of the people who get care it's not. > It is fucking expensive and has issues with how we go about paying for it largely do to government regulations and interference in the market place The places that provide equal or better outcomes at far lower prices (both per GDP and per capita) don't have less-regulated markets. So, no, I don't think you've identified the actual problem correctly, though I get that that's always going to be the explanation offered by those dogmatically devoted to the religion of laissez-faire.
        7y ago
- turk73 7y ago
  How so? Because we already know who all the people are who are committing 99% of the crimes. We don't do shit about it! They get arrested and turned back out onto the streets. So how would new technology matter? And you know what else would be cool? To see some prosecutions of the real, big-time crooks like the Biden family! That would at least enable me to continue believing that this country isn't an oligarchy. From where I'm sitting, the just-us system looks pretty two-tiered.

Stunning naivete on display here

by slimed 7y ago

Stunning naivete on display here

How so? They point out the difficulty balancing personal privacy and tools to identify criminals who have evaded justice. Just because you don't agree with the relative importance placed on either side doesn't make them dumb or naive.

CaptainZapp 7y ago
What makes you naive is if you put any smidegeon of hope into the fact that insurance companies will not hesitate to buy and abuse such data to fuck you over left, right and central then you really are beyond help. If you want to risk that, fine. But you're also screwing all your relatives in the same swell process. And that's not only naive and dumb, that's totally reckless.
- kalleboo 7y ago
  The solution to that is to abolish or neuter your insurance companies like the us in the rest of the world did. The fact that a private for-profit company decides if you live or die is absurd.
  - TeMPOraL 7y ago
    Last I checked, medical and life insurance is a thing everywhere else in the world as well. While a public healthcare system will pay for your treatment, it will not pay for the loss of earnings/business during your stay in the hospital and convalescence, nor will it pay you if you end up with a permanent disability (social security may cover a pittance of the latter).
    - kalleboo 7y ago
      That's why I also stuck the word "neuter" in there. It's not difficult to regulate what insurance companies are allowed to consider. Data brokerage can also be regulated (the GDPR would not allow 23andme to sell genetic data to insurance companies without strict opt-in)
      - CaptainZapp 7y ago
        the GDPR would not allow 23andme to sell genetic data to insurance companies without strict opt-in That's true. But there's a different issue and the very reason why I would never do such testing. An insurance company cannot enforce a genetic test on you in order to write a policy. What they can and will do, however, is ask you in the questionaire for such a policy if you did a genetic test and if yes they would oblige you to share the results before writing a policy. The problem here is you can't lie. If you did a test and you deny it and it's proven later that you lied the insurance will refuse coverage. So it's in your best interest not to get tested at all. My understanding is that it's very different in the US. Such data is insanely valuable to insurers and that directly translates to the prices they're willing to pay for it. Unethical? Sure as hell. Illegal? Probably not without a strong legal framework.
    - CaptainZapp 7y ago
      it will not pay for the loss of earnings/business during your stay in the hospital and convalescence I can't speak for other countries in Europe. But in Switzerland you have mandatory coverage from your employer. The employer will pay your salary for a certain amount of time. After that insurance will kick in and pay (usually) 80% for up to a couple of years. After that invalidity insurance kicks in. That's usually about 60% of your salary until retirement. You can buy added coverage to raise those percentages. Bankrupcy for medical reasons is pretty much unheard of herearound.
  - syshum 7y ago
    >>The fact that a private for-profit company decides if you live or die is absurd. Yes it is much better when corupt government bureaucrats do that ::Rolleyes::
    - JshWright 7y ago
      I think the level of "corrupt" is up for some debate, but it's pretty inarguable that the US pays substantially more for a system that is objectively worse in many ways. So your sarcastic comment is actually correct...
      - syshum 7y ago
        the US Healthcare system is second to none in the world. The actual CARE people in the US get is the best in the world, wealthy people from every nation come here to get their care It is fucking expensive and has issues with how we go about paying for it largely do to government regulations and interference in the market place But the actual care... No that is not "objectively worse" to any country anywhere, our health care is the best. People often confuse care with insurance, our Insurance system sucks largely do to government
        dragonwriter 7y ago
        >the US Healthcare system is second to none in the world 77th or so maybe to some, but definitely not second to anything, sure. > The actual CARE people in the US get is the best in the world, No, it's not consistently. The care a very small fraction get is, perhaps. But even for most of the people who get care it's not. > It is fucking expensive and has issues with how we go about paying for it largely do to government regulations and interference in the market place The places that provide equal or better outcomes at far lower prices (both per GDP and per capita) don't have less-regulated markets. So, no, I don't think you've identified the actual problem correctly, though I get that that's always going to be the explanation offered by those dogmatically devoted to the religion of laissez-faire.
        7y ago
turk73 7y ago
How so? Because we already know who all the people are who are committing 99% of the crimes. We don't do shit about it! They get arrested and turned back out onto the streets. So how would new technology matter? And you know what else would be cool? To see some prosecutions of the real, big-time crooks like the Biden family! That would at least enable me to continue believing that this country isn't an oligarchy. From where I'm sitting, the just-us system looks pretty two-tiered.