4 ms·
> 4th amendment violation because DNA is scary to the lay person it seems. There's probably a curve where it gets scary again as you know more about it. DNA i
by gopalv 4y ago
> 4th amendment violation because DNA is scary to the lay person it seems.
There's probably a curve where it gets scary again as you know more about it.
DNA isn't just identification. It is a lot more than just a unique identifier, it is a whole history and a lot of future probabilities.
My list of SNPs is a lot less "if you have nothing to hide" about it.
Imagine a government which looks at SCN1/SCN2 before issuing a drivers license.
- pc86 4y agoIs there a genetic component to being a skilled and/or safe driver? Society as a whole would probably be a lot better off if we stopped pretending driving around 4,000-lb hunks of metal at 80mph/130kph was some sort of inalienable right and actually showed some discretion in who was allowed to do it and who wasn't. But it's not realistic, especially if you live outside of a city.
- asdff 4y agoWell the government is not doing that in this case. They don't care about phenotypes for this analysis. The phenotypes are used for other analysis like public health efforts, but for law enforcement they just ask whether one pattern matches another and to what proportion it matches, and then if it matches a psuedorelative they go about to see if there is infact a person who could be this psuedorelative, then they go about and see if the person did commit the crime with other pieces of evidence.