4 ms·

It may be the gene that controls for credulity, as those with the gene for paranoia are unlikely to cede their genetic information to some shady company.

kevinwuhoo 3y ago
This study was done using data from the UK Biobank [1] which is registered as a non-profit. Participants were also volunteers only. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Biobank https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Biobank
- beaker52 3y ago
  It's quite a fun thought experiment to think about how you might avoid this bias. Send Blackhawk helicopters to collect samples by force? Was there bias in the selection technique? What about the people genetically predisposed to avoid the Blackhawk helicopters? We'd need multiple collection methods, and still need to retain an unbiased distribution. You can continue until you get to "we should set up global search patterns so that no human can escape our dystopian DNA collection". And even then you're still biased by population effects owing to the probability that there is a genetic population who have been predisposed to suppress their own genetic population at this point in time. Gosh, it sounds like a fever dream.
  - solarkraft 3y ago
    Bias in surveys is an interesting and hard problem to think about, but not really a new one. Seems to me like the typical demographic control approaches would work here too.
  - Kerb_ 3y ago
    Why not take DNA from randomly selected trashcans, since discarded waste can be used to steal DNA https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/07/20/police-are-using-surreptitious-dna-collection-to-solve-cold-murder-cases/70427941007/#:~:text=%22To%20defend%20its%20warrantless%20search,discarded%20items%2C%22%20she%20wrote https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/07/20/police....
    - RoyalHenOil 3y ago
      Even then, you'd bias your sample toward people who use those trash cans (people who live near the trash cans you selected, people who don't litter, people who spend a lot of time in public if they are public trash cans, etc.)
astrange 3y ago
There is more or less nothing useful someone can do with your genetic information, and there's no way you can prevent anyone from having it, since you leave it everywhere you go.
- Symmetry 3y ago
  Knowing I'm a FUT2 non-secreter has actually been pretty useful to me a few times not having to worry about taking care of people in norovirus outbreaks.
- makeitdouble 3y ago
  This feels like the "if you have nothing to hide..." argument for DNA. It looks decent on the surface, but the more you dig in the more issues arise. Thinking about it for 30s: - profiling is a direct use of DNA. Police had access to private dna banks and used the information extensively. Who else is using these same dna banks ? - the same way people don't want AI farms to ingest their content, you might not want dna bases to ingest and process your dna for profit. You might actually eish a more ethical entity gets sole access to your information. - you don't leave your dna everywhere. Getting a full dna sequence from hair or fingerprints is a myth at this point.
- bglazer 3y ago
  It’s worth noting that the reason nothing “useful” can be done with genetic information in the United States is the Genetic information Nondiscrimination act of 2008. This prevents insurers from denying coverage or increasing premiums based on genetic information. It also prevents employers from making hiring or promotion decisions based on genetics. These are the most straightforward ways in which companies could profit off your genetic information. Basically denying insurance coverage or employment if they think you’re likely to get ill from a genetic disease. There’s also a much murkier aspect in which employers could try to guess your intelligence based on genetics. I’m absolutely certain employers would do try to do this despite it having virtually no utility.
  - astrange 3y ago
    The main reason you can't be denied health insurance anymore is the preexisting conditions ban in the ACA. That's a much stronger signal than your SNPs. But most privacy complaints here come from the idea that an evil corporation is going to get specifically your genes, look at them, and then somehow invent a super profitable medicine from that. Which doesn't really make sense.
8jef 3y ago
Out of sheer curiosity, I've mailed a swab taken from my mouth, after payment, so long ago, I can't remember which came first: that, or me closing my first Facebook account and becoming techno anxious (paranoid of some sort). I'm guessing I like trying stupid things before reflecting on them, because novelty factor.

kevinwuhoo 3y ago

This study was done using data from the UK Biobank [1] which is registered as a non-profit. Participants were also volunteers only. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Biobank https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_Biobank

beaker52 3y ago
It's quite a fun thought experiment to think about how you might avoid this bias. Send Blackhawk helicopters to collect samples by force? Was there bias in the selection technique? What about the people genetically predisposed to avoid the Blackhawk helicopters? We'd need multiple collection methods, and still need to retain an unbiased distribution. You can continue until you get to "we should set up global search patterns so that no human can escape our dystopian DNA collection". And even then you're still biased by population effects owing to the probability that there is a genetic population who have been predisposed to suppress their own genetic population at this point in time. Gosh, it sounds like a fever dream.
- solarkraft 3y ago
  Bias in surveys is an interesting and hard problem to think about, but not really a new one. Seems to me like the typical demographic control approaches would work here too.
- Kerb_ 3y ago
  Why not take DNA from randomly selected trashcans, since discarded waste can be used to steal DNA https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/07/20/police-are-using-surreptitious-dna-collection-to-solve-cold-murder-cases/70427941007/#:~:text=%22To%20defend%20its%20warrantless%20search,discarded%20items%2C%22%20she%20wrote https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2023/07/20/police....
  - RoyalHenOil 3y ago
    Even then, you'd bias your sample toward people who use those trash cans (people who live near the trash cans you selected, people who don't litter, people who spend a lot of time in public if they are public trash cans, etc.)

astrange 3y ago

There is more or less nothing useful someone can do with your genetic information, and there's no way you can prevent anyone from having it, since you leave it everywhere you go.

Symmetry 3y ago
Knowing I'm a FUT2 non-secreter has actually been pretty useful to me a few times not having to worry about taking care of people in norovirus outbreaks.
makeitdouble 3y ago
This feels like the "if you have nothing to hide..." argument for DNA. It looks decent on the surface, but the more you dig in the more issues arise. Thinking about it for 30s: - profiling is a direct use of DNA. Police had access to private dna banks and used the information extensively. Who else is using these same dna banks ? - the same way people don't want AI farms to ingest their content, you might not want dna bases to ingest and process your dna for profit. You might actually eish a more ethical entity gets sole access to your information. - you don't leave your dna everywhere. Getting a full dna sequence from hair or fingerprints is a myth at this point.
bglazer 3y ago
It’s worth noting that the reason nothing “useful” can be done with genetic information in the United States is the Genetic information Nondiscrimination act of 2008. This prevents insurers from denying coverage or increasing premiums based on genetic information. It also prevents employers from making hiring or promotion decisions based on genetics. These are the most straightforward ways in which companies could profit off your genetic information. Basically denying insurance coverage or employment if they think you’re likely to get ill from a genetic disease. There’s also a much murkier aspect in which employers could try to guess your intelligence based on genetics. I’m absolutely certain employers would do try to do this despite it having virtually no utility.
- astrange 3y ago
  The main reason you can't be denied health insurance anymore is the preexisting conditions ban in the ACA. That's a much stronger signal than your SNPs. But most privacy complaints here come from the idea that an evil corporation is going to get specifically your genes, look at them, and then somehow invent a super profitable medicine from that. Which doesn't really make sense.

8jef 3y ago

Out of sheer curiosity, I've mailed a swab taken from my mouth, after payment, so long ago, I can't remember which came first: that, or me closing my first Facebook account and becoming techno anxious (paranoid of some sort). I'm guessing I like trying stupid things before reflecting on them, because novelty factor.