Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

While I agree with you, I would not be willing to get a test from these companies even given a law that banned insurance companies from using genomic information (which is a good law, and should be passed!)

There's still the matter of law enforcement having future access to the database for a broad search which concerns me. I don't think I'd be willing to donate to a genomic database unless there was a very strong safeguard against the police making a broad search against the database.



> very strong safeguard against the police making a broad search against the database.

Not likely. The whole point of the DB is to allow "broad searches."

Here's where things get a bit wonky.

LPRs (License Plate Readers), although "icky," are -more or less- legal. The whole purpose of a displayed license plate is to allow the authorities to rapidly match the vehicle with the registered entity.

Driving a vehicle is a privilege and an obligation, so it can easily be argued that driving a vehicle comes with the obligation to display a "tracking" plate. In fact, this might even extend to adding RF trackers. We're almost there, with EZ-Pass (Eastern US).

Phones get a bit dicier. Stingrays are still very much in a legal "gray area." Until they are explicitly banned, we'll probably be seeing lots of them. Just too damn juicy.

But DNA is something else. We don't need to be licensed as "humans" (although I'm sure there's folks that would love to give it a go).

Much as we'd wish folks would live in a manner that obliged them to follow social norms (which is a whole bucket of snakes, right there), that ain't happening. There's no "hook" to force people to submit to DNA tagging; nor (IMNSHO), should there be.

There was some founding father -I don't remember who- that said something along the lines of "I would rather see 100 guilty men go, than one innocent man imprisoned."




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: