3 ms·

The thing to keep in mind is that that data can't be just be linked automatically to people, they need, as the article says to "compare these sequences to publi

The thing to keep in mind is that that data can't be just be linked automatically to people, they need, as the article says to "compare these sequences to public genetic data without too much difficulty." It's just another version of a researching accidentally capturing you in a camera, but much harder to link you to the captured information.

ehhthing 3y ago
We're a small step right now from the police getting access to genetic databases like 23andMe, so if anyone in your family tree has gotten a genetic test it may be possible for them to identify you based on ancestry.
- SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
  Then they'd know that that person had a relative there. We're still a lot of dots away from going "Well, we found this DNA by accident, it was clearly and obvious Bob was there."
  - pfdietz 3y ago
    I'm expecting the Republicans (if they haven't already) to insist that immigrants get their DNA put into databases. The argument would be that US citizens of long standing are already likely to have relatives in such databases (along with the genealogical information to exploit it) while criminal immigrants would be cloaked from such scrutiny, at least at first.
    - S_A_P 3y ago
      Why stop at Republicans? I would think that a bill that allows for more people data would get bipartisan support no problem.
      - pfdietz 3y ago
        Oh, quite likely (especially if it there is a plausible justification as I gave), but I think the GOP would be more likely to push it initially.
    - jonhohle 3y ago
      s/Republicans/politicians/; s/immigrants/everyone/ Based on the last 2 years of "show your papers" vaccine cards, I'm not sure why you'd pin this on Republicans.
      - pfdietz 3y ago
        Because the Republicans appear to enjoy abusing immigrants.
    - some_random 3y ago
      Both parties are ecstatic to turn this nation into a surveillance panopticon, make no mistake
  - idontpost 3y ago
    [dead]
  - oilchange 3y ago
    > We're still a lot of dots away from going "Well, we found this DNA by accident, it was clearly and obvious Bob was there." Once they have a relative, it isn't that difficult to narrow it down to Bob. Think about it, you went from 350 million possible candidates to maybe 50 or less. Go to the relative and ask them if they have any relatives in or near state X or city Y. That should narrow it down to a handful. And also you can narrow further by gender. Once you find a relative, you can logarithmically cull the search space.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  The GEDMatch database has frequently been used for this purpose. https://hn.algolia.com/?q=gedmatch https://hn.algolia.com/?q=gedmatch
- morebortplates 3y ago
  That's exactly how the so called Golden State Killer was caught. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_James_DeAngelo#Investigation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_James_DeAngelo#Invest... Video by Veritassium about the case: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KT18KJouHWg https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KT18KJouHWg
- samtho 3y ago
  > it may be possible for them to identify you based on ancestry Small correction, but an important one: The ancestry portion of the consumer autosomal DNA testing does not imply genetic relation to another human being. By contrast, the genetic relative matching these tests perform is very accurate because it lines up matching SNPs between your test and others’ tests to determine relation.
EMCymatics 3y ago
The amount of people who have used 23andME, ancestry et all can absolutely help identify people based on their relatives.
acomjean 3y ago
Some states take DNA from anyone arrested. But they can search for family members (California approved this in 2010 I think). They caught the "Grim Sleeper" partially because his son got arrested for a Felony. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grim_Sleeper https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grim_Sleeper "Franklin was identified at least in part on familial DNA analysis.[41] Police had found no exact match between DNA found at the crime scenes and any of the profiles in California's DNA profile database, so they searched the database for stored profiles that demonstrated sufficient similarity to allow police to infer a familial relationship. They found similar DNA belonging to Franklin's son, Christopher, who had been convicted of a felony weapons charge in 2008. Christopher was too young to have committed the murders, but the familial DNA match led investigators to look at his father, Lonnie, as the likely perpetrator.[42]"

ehhthing 3y ago

We're a small step right now from the police getting access to genetic databases like 23andMe, so if anyone in your family tree has gotten a genetic test it may be possible for them to identify you based on ancestry.

SketchySeaBeast 3y ago
Then they'd know that that person had a relative there. We're still a lot of dots away from going "Well, we found this DNA by accident, it was clearly and obvious Bob was there."
- pfdietz 3y ago
  I'm expecting the Republicans (if they haven't already) to insist that immigrants get their DNA put into databases. The argument would be that US citizens of long standing are already likely to have relatives in such databases (along with the genealogical information to exploit it) while criminal immigrants would be cloaked from such scrutiny, at least at first.
  - S_A_P 3y ago
    Why stop at Republicans? I would think that a bill that allows for more people data would get bipartisan support no problem.
    - pfdietz 3y ago
      Oh, quite likely (especially if it there is a plausible justification as I gave), but I think the GOP would be more likely to push it initially.
  - jonhohle 3y ago
    s/Republicans/politicians/; s/immigrants/everyone/ Based on the last 2 years of "show your papers" vaccine cards, I'm not sure why you'd pin this on Republicans.
    - pfdietz 3y ago
      Because the Republicans appear to enjoy abusing immigrants.
  - some_random 3y ago
    Both parties are ecstatic to turn this nation into a surveillance panopticon, make no mistake
- idontpost 3y ago
  [dead]
- oilchange 3y ago
  > We're still a lot of dots away from going "Well, we found this DNA by accident, it was clearly and obvious Bob was there." Once they have a relative, it isn't that difficult to narrow it down to Bob. Think about it, you went from 350 million possible candidates to maybe 50 or less. Go to the relative and ask them if they have any relatives in or near state X or city Y. That should narrow it down to a handful. And also you can narrow further by gender. Once you find a relative, you can logarithmically cull the search space.
toomuchtodo 3y ago
The GEDMatch database has frequently been used for this purpose. https://hn.algolia.com/?q=gedmatch https://hn.algolia.com/?q=gedmatch
morebortplates 3y ago
That's exactly how the so called Golden State Killer was caught. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_James_DeAngelo#Investigation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_James_DeAngelo#Invest... Video by Veritassium about the case: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KT18KJouHWg https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KT18KJouHWg
samtho 3y ago
> it may be possible for them to identify you based on ancestry Small correction, but an important one: The ancestry portion of the consumer autosomal DNA testing does not imply genetic relation to another human being. By contrast, the genetic relative matching these tests perform is very accurate because it lines up matching SNPs between your test and others’ tests to determine relation.

EMCymatics 3y ago

The amount of people who have used 23andME, ancestry et all can absolutely help identify people based on their relatives.

acomjean 3y ago

Some states take DNA from anyone arrested. But they can search for family members (California approved this in 2010 I think). They caught the "Grim Sleeper" partially because his son got arrested for a Felony. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grim_Sleeper https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grim_Sleeper "Franklin was identified at least in part on familial DNA analysis.[41] Police had found no exact match between DNA found at the crime scenes and any of the profiles in California's DNA profile database, so they searched the database for stored profiles that demonstrated sufficient similarity to allow police to infer a familial relationship. They found similar DNA belonging to Franklin's son, Christopher, who had been convicted of a felony weapons charge in 2008. Christopher was too young to have committed the murders, but the familial DNA match led investigators to look at his father, Lonnie, as the likely perpetrator.[42]"