7 ms·

In the not so distant future the government will have have a database with everyone's dna. It's just not possible to keep something secret that you literally sh

by im3w1l 4y ago

In the not so distant future the government will have have a database with everyone's dna. It's just not possible to keep something secret that you literally shed everywhere you go.

Supermancho 4y ago
re: Gattaca We aren't there yet. That's still an important fact, when determining the legality of how DNA is used.
- Overtonwindow 4y ago
  Such an interesting movie… I confess as a high school kid when I first saw it I thought “imagine the possibilities“ whereas others were thinking “that’s sad and horrible“ …
  - anonporridge 4y ago
    It's quite a silly movie actually. There's no need to do that amount of genetic testing to determine a person's potential when the zip code they grew up in will suffice.
    - cuttysnark 4y ago
      So, Hunger Games?
    - knorker 4y ago
      I feel like you don't actually remember the movie at all. It's an amazing movie. It's only the same in the way that "A stranger comes to town" is a description of every single movie ever made. If you want overt zipcode inequality then In Time is a better match. (but much lesser of a movie)
      - anonporridge 4y ago
        Oh I do. Gattaca is my favorite film of all time that I rewatch every other year. I was merely being tongue in cheek about the modern reality of class inequality.
    - stjohnswarts 4y ago
      There is nothing silly with characterizing a person's abilities, potential health issues, intelligence, and physical extents for purposes of the government via genetics. It's horrifying and very possible. Likely going on in some countries already. I'm not sure why you suggest otherwise.
  - stjohnswarts 4y ago
    did you become a geneticist?
anonporridge 4y ago
Even if you didn't shed it everywhere, we really just need a database of a subset of people, which we can use to match close relations to and drastically narrow down the search. e.g. how the Golden State killer was finally found, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_James_DeAngelo#Arrest_and_trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_James_DeAngelo#Arrest_a... Your DNA is fundamentally public information.
tablespoon 4y ago
> In the not so distant future the government will have have a database with everyone's dna. It's just not possible to keep something secret that you literally shed everywhere you go. There's an important difference between physically being able to keep something secret, and legally being able to keep something secret. For instance: today the government has the physical ability to break into my house and shoot me in the head for no reason at all, but they don't have the legal ability to do so. Likewise, they have the physical ability to illegally obtain evidence, but not the legal ability to use that evidence to convict someone at trial.
- DwnVoteHoneyPot 4y ago
  Glad you highlighted "today", because tomorrow is much different as supreme court and FBI become more politicized. Rules seem to change on a whim. Or as in Canada gov't can declare an emergency an seize protester bank accounts. Another thing to point out is "today" should be in "today in some countries". Russian oil executives are mysteriously falling out of windows and boats all of the sudden.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - giraffe_lady 4y ago
    I mean ever heard of fred hampton? That one blew up publicity-wise and is fairly famous now but there's no reason to think it was the only relatively recent example or that they've ever stopped doing things like that. The rules aren't meaningless but they also don't stop the government from assassinating you if they decide that works out best for them.
- im3w1l 4y ago
  I agree, but when it's this difficult to physically kept it secret, then someone will collect it. That someone will then tell the police in return for some favor and the police will cook up some parallel construction. The result is the same except more corrupt and expensive.
- 4y ago
Overtonwindow 4y ago
This might sound far-fetched, but I believe The government already has genetic information on north of 50% of the population. However, inefficient distribution of data and legalities of its use have deeply slowed widespread use. The future we should fear is one with an efficient and interconnected government, capable of pulling a DNA match out of a database five government agencies removed, on the side of the highway…
- edgyquant 4y ago
  Why should we fear this anymore than the current government?
  - stjohnswarts 4y ago
    They already have too much power and know too much about us. Governments are really just the elite in control and not to be trusted. Sure some countries have a bit more turn over that others (democracies) but in the end you should always be suspicious of government and very very careful about whatever power you allow them to have through your vote. In many countries it is already too late without armed rebellion (turkey, china, russia, venezuela, for example)
    - edgyquant 4y ago
      I agree just stating that governments won’t be worse because of this.
- gremlinsinc 4y ago
  My biggest fear is footprinting tech that can literally follow us everywhere and even ID us if we're wearing a mask by our size+gait etc... Mix this with some dystopian social credit system where you get points for reporting the littlest offense to big brother, and some more spying tools to spy on our own people and we literally get thought police. Soon it'll be 1984 IRL. I don't plan on being criminal, but what's legal today could be criminal tomorrow, or what's legal in one city might not be in another, etc. I don't think we're there yet, but the future could turn all shades of bad if we don't get upset over privacy violations now.
jupp0r 4y ago
There are lots of things that the government has technically been able to do but that laws are preventing it from doing. Society has a choice here. I'm not going to argue one way or another, but having an honest debates about trade offs either way and making an explicit decision would certainly be better than things like the case mentioned in the article silently creeping in.
323 4y ago
> A prenatal test used worldwide sends gene data of pregnant women to the company that developed it with China's military. The U.S. sees a security risk. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-china-bgi-dna/ https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-c...
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
stjohnswarts 4y ago
this should be illegal to even create unless you are 100% convicted of a crime. Government should not have access to such a databse.

by im3w1l 4y ago

In the not so distant future the government will have have a database with everyone's dna. It's just not possible to keep something secret that you literally shed everywhere you go.

Supermancho 4y ago

re: Gattaca We aren't there yet. That's still an important fact, when determining the legality of how DNA is used.

Overtonwindow 4y ago
Such an interesting movie… I confess as a high school kid when I first saw it I thought “imagine the possibilities“ whereas others were thinking “that’s sad and horrible“ …
- anonporridge 4y ago
  It's quite a silly movie actually. There's no need to do that amount of genetic testing to determine a person's potential when the zip code they grew up in will suffice.
  - cuttysnark 4y ago
    So, Hunger Games?
  - knorker 4y ago
    I feel like you don't actually remember the movie at all. It's an amazing movie. It's only the same in the way that "A stranger comes to town" is a description of every single movie ever made. If you want overt zipcode inequality then In Time is a better match. (but much lesser of a movie)
    - anonporridge 4y ago
      Oh I do. Gattaca is my favorite film of all time that I rewatch every other year. I was merely being tongue in cheek about the modern reality of class inequality.
  - stjohnswarts 4y ago
    There is nothing silly with characterizing a person's abilities, potential health issues, intelligence, and physical extents for purposes of the government via genetics. It's horrifying and very possible. Likely going on in some countries already. I'm not sure why you suggest otherwise.
- stjohnswarts 4y ago
  did you become a geneticist?

anonporridge 4y ago

Even if you didn't shed it everywhere, we really just need a database of a subset of people, which we can use to match close relations to and drastically narrow down the search. e.g. how the Golden State killer was finally found, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_James_DeAngelo#Arrest_and_trial https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_James_DeAngelo#Arrest_a... Your DNA is fundamentally public information.

tablespoon 4y ago

> In the not so distant future the government will have have a database with everyone's dna. It's just not possible to keep something secret that you literally shed everywhere you go. There's an important difference between physically being able to keep something secret, and legally being able to keep something secret. For instance: today the government has the physical ability to break into my house and shoot me in the head for no reason at all, but they don't have the legal ability to do so. Likewise, they have the physical ability to illegally obtain evidence, but not the legal ability to use that evidence to convict someone at trial.

DwnVoteHoneyPot 4y ago
Glad you highlighted "today", because tomorrow is much different as supreme court and FBI become more politicized. Rules seem to change on a whim. Or as in Canada gov't can declare an emergency an seize protester bank accounts. Another thing to point out is "today" should be in "today in some countries". Russian oil executives are mysteriously falling out of windows and boats all of the sudden.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- giraffe_lady 4y ago
  I mean ever heard of fred hampton? That one blew up publicity-wise and is fairly famous now but there's no reason to think it was the only relatively recent example or that they've ever stopped doing things like that. The rules aren't meaningless but they also don't stop the government from assassinating you if they decide that works out best for them.
im3w1l 4y ago
I agree, but when it's this difficult to physically kept it secret, then someone will collect it. That someone will then tell the police in return for some favor and the police will cook up some parallel construction. The result is the same except more corrupt and expensive.
4y ago

Overtonwindow 4y ago

This might sound far-fetched, but I believe The government already has genetic information on north of 50% of the population. However, inefficient distribution of data and legalities of its use have deeply slowed widespread use. The future we should fear is one with an efficient and interconnected government, capable of pulling a DNA match out of a database five government agencies removed, on the side of the highway…

edgyquant 4y ago
Why should we fear this anymore than the current government?
- stjohnswarts 4y ago
  They already have too much power and know too much about us. Governments are really just the elite in control and not to be trusted. Sure some countries have a bit more turn over that others (democracies) but in the end you should always be suspicious of government and very very careful about whatever power you allow them to have through your vote. In many countries it is already too late without armed rebellion (turkey, china, russia, venezuela, for example)
  - edgyquant 4y ago
    I agree just stating that governments won’t be worse because of this.
gremlinsinc 4y ago
My biggest fear is footprinting tech that can literally follow us everywhere and even ID us if we're wearing a mask by our size+gait etc... Mix this with some dystopian social credit system where you get points for reporting the littlest offense to big brother, and some more spying tools to spy on our own people and we literally get thought police. Soon it'll be 1984 IRL. I don't plan on being criminal, but what's legal today could be criminal tomorrow, or what's legal in one city might not be in another, etc. I don't think we're there yet, but the future could turn all shades of bad if we don't get upset over privacy violations now.

jupp0r 4y ago

There are lots of things that the government has technically been able to do but that laws are preventing it from doing. Society has a choice here. I'm not going to argue one way or another, but having an honest debates about trade offs either way and making an explicit decision would certainly be better than things like the case mentioned in the article silently creeping in.

323 4y ago

> A prenatal test used worldwide sends gene data of pregnant women to the company that developed it with China's military. The U.S. sees a security risk. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-china-bgi-dna/ https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-c...

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

stjohnswarts 4y ago

this should be illegal to even create unless you are 100% convicted of a crime. Government should not have access to such a databse.