7 ms·
Unfortunately, my in-laws did one of these services, which means my children are now potentially identifiable to some future unfriendly regime. This is a disast
by chromatin 4y ago
Unfortunately, my in-laws did one of these services, which means my children are now potentially identifiable to some future unfriendly regime. This is a disaster for human rights advocates of the future.
- sacrosancty 4y ago[dead]
- bryan0 4y agoWhat’s the use case here? A state wants to find all members of a certain family, so they get DNA from the population and compare against a genealogy database? Seems like there would be more straightforward ways to achieve this?
- sva_ 4y agoA bunch of people could be doing political activism at some location and be tracked down. Such scenarios don't seem too far fetched and the way these things will be abused in the future will probably be much more perverse, in ways we can't even imagine today.
- nelox 4y agoPhilip K. Dick had some ideas: The End of Genetic Privacy in the Blade Runner Canon - https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9731365/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9731365/
- sofixa 4y ago> Such scenarios don't seem too far fetched They kind of do though. > A bunch of people could be doing political activism at some location and be tracked down Considering political activism is usually in groups out in the open, how practical would be to find the people participating via DNA tests (of what? maybe if they spit on the ground?), compared to the already existing and used phone geolocation and face recognition? Yes those can be protected against by not carrying a phone and wearing a mask/balaclava, but one can also take steps not to leave any DNA residue of use. So I think it's pretty far fetched, and if you're concerned about your government abusing political activists (within reason of course, coup plotters are also technically political activists but not the type one wants to protect) there are better things to do than to focus on one specific impractical avenue of recognition that could lead to abuse.
- geoduck14 4y agoThey want to find who committed <some crime they just made up that isn't actually bad>, so they identify DNA and compare it against the known database. This is pretty standard "how will we respond if there is a future authoritian regime"? (not saying the fear is unjustified - just saying the fear is pretty standard) -------- Edit: People are really misunderstanding my comment. Let me try again. To be clear, this is hypothetical: The government makes it illegal to support anyone of opposing political party. Which includes, not buying from their store. They go to the restaurant of the opposing party and run a DNA test on all of the silverware. They arrest anyone whose DNA matches the DNA on the silverware - because those people "supported" the opposing party.
- mcbutterbunz 4y agoI agree bit at the same time I would imagine authoritarian regimes wouldn’t care about the specifics of DNA when they can just use their absolute authority to imprison people.
- edgyquant 4y agoIn this case can’t they just lie then?
- aerovistae 4y agoIf a regime wants to make up a crime and arrest some targets, what difference does it make if there's a genealogy database?
- dylan604 4y agoTo have evidence to pacify some of those still on the fence about the regime vs out right in favor? The anti-regime will always be anti, but if you can keep those undecideds pacified with attempts at evidence/fair trial, you can make it look like majority in favor
- vintermann 4y agoOf course, it's true an evil regime can just accuse random people of crimes and arrest them. But it's much worse if they manage to identify actual critics, people who actually defied them in some way. The regime that strikes out randomly, probably that ferments opposition, right? The revolution that eats its young is a lot less scary than the revolution that consistently eats its enemies.
- Thorrez 4y agoIf there's a certain racial group that the government wants to get rid of, this would be a large help. See this article about how records of who is Jewish were important to the Nazis[1]. Although I'm not sure how likely this is to be an actual threat we face. [1] https://jacquesmattheij.com/if-you-have-nothing-to-hide/ https://jacquesmattheij.com/if-you-have-nothing-to-hide/
- matthewdgreen 4y agoThe East German Stasi kept thousands of “scent jars” so they could use dogs to track specific citizens. I’m not sure how effective DNA surveillance would be in this tracking role, but one could imagine future improvements in the technology that make it more feasible. https://www.spymuseum.org/exhibition-experiences/about-the-collection/collection-highlights/stasi-scent-jars/ https://www.spymuseum.org/exhibition-experiences/about-the-c...
- belorn 4y agoThe major (mis)uses would be faulty forensics where from human mistake, computer error, equipment failure, hash collision, procedural failure, or manufactured evidence. If the law is sane then there is safeguards that require independent proof of evidence beyond that of DNA, but in cases where they are desperate enough to go to genealogy databases there tend to be a major lack of independent evidence beyond of DNA.
- astrange 4y agoThey were always identifiable. If anyone ever even slightly cares about your DNA, you have no way of stopping them from getting it - you literally leave it everywhere you go.
- ErikVandeWater 4y agoEven if you leave DNA everywhere you go, but if law enforcement doesn't have your DNA on file, there's nothing to match it to.
- dekhn 4y agothat's only true in a world where there is no genetic history/population structure, and people don't contribute to 23andMe and similar systems.
- astrange 4y agoThis works by matching to your relatives and assuming you have the same last name, not to you.
- xeromal 4y agoI think what they're saying is they could simply get your DNA the next time you go to the DMV and have database if they really wanted it.
- mgraczyk 4y agoOn the other hand, solving actual crimes today has to be weighed against hypothetical future misuse by a hypothetical "future unfriendly regime". People have different beliefs about the probability of such a future, but to me it seems like this is a big win for society.
- homeland221 4y agoConsidering Clinton, Nancy and current FBIs and CIAs very questionable operations, unfriendly regime is already here.
- Whatarethese 4y agok
- hoseja 4y agoActual crimes today are less than statistical error when compared to traffic accidents, obesity and the like. They are only overblown so you feel grateful to the state for solving them and dread what would happen without Big Brother.
- mgraczyk 4y agoI like saving lives with technology, even if we don't save all possible lives.
- supertrope 4y agoAn authoritarian or totalitarian government can have millions of casualties and total loss of freedom.
- mgraczyk 4y agoAnd if the probability of that happening AND the genome database being necessary for that government to carry out it's murders is smaller than 1e-7, then the database is good. I think it's much smaller than that, essentially zero.
- googlryas 4y agoGSK was caught by 3rd cousins uploading DNA - your children probably have hundreds of relatives at that level. Look on the bright side - at least if you children turn out to be murderers, they will be brought to justice more swiftly even if they're really careful about their crimes.
- vintermann 4y agoUnless they're murderers allied with the government, of course. Then it's maybe their critics that will be "brought to justice". Again, I don't understand people who fear nameless nobodies over actually powerful people.
- chromatin 4y agoYes there is a surprising amount of worry about serial killers in this thread, compared with authoritarian governments who have killed literally millions of times more people [than serial killers] in just the 20th century alone.
- googlryas 4y agoThose governments had much no problem pulling off their antics without genetic genealogy.
- nelox 4y agoIn this study “… a genetic database containing just 2 percent of a target population could lead to a third cousin or closer match for nearly anyone.” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7549546/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7549546/
- anonu 4y agoMore like a disaster for human rights advocates today, as this is very much technology being used now. But what's the alternative? If you assume mass surveillance techniques are illegal and not being used in the US, i would be ok with a DNA database that provides a loose correlation to other family members, if it's used for purposes such as this one. The lesser of two evils
- teeray 4y agoIt does make you wonder if it’s really valid consent that a person grants to one of these databases when the information they’re granting access to is shared by a group of individuals.