Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Monday August 06 2018, @04:05PM   Printer-friendly
from the How-do-anonymize-DNA? dept.

Submitted via IRC for BoyceMagooglyMonkey

23andMe has reached a deal with pharma giant GlaxoSmithKline, giving the company access to their (your) genetic data to potentially develop new drugs. Did they just sell us all out? Not exactly.

This isn't the first deal where 23andMe has allowed companies to use their (your) data for their research. The company makes up to $199 when you buy one of their spit kits and send in your DNA, but their business model has always depended on leveraging the data they amass as a result. The company has previously made similar, though smaller, deals with Genentech and Pfizer.

[...] The company doesn't technically hand over your data; analysts at 23andMe provide "summary statistics" to third parties. This is relatively safe, in theory, but if you're not sure how you feel about it, just click "Change Consent" under your account settings.

Source: https://vitals.lifehacker.com/what-you-re-really-agreeing-to-when-you-sign-up-for-23a-1828034397


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Monday August 06 2018, @04:50PM (10 children)

    by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 06 2018, @04:50PM (#717893) Journal

    The fun crimes are not (usually) fun for the victims of those crimes.

    Don't worry they'll start taking everyone's DNA soon enough. Police states simply cannot resist. It is too powerful a temptation. (Just as pedophiles say.) It will happen by inches. So we'll gradually accept it.

    First they'll start taking DNA of people who volunteer.

    One day they'll start taking DNA of people convicted of crimes.

    Then they'll eventually take DNA of people arrested, even if falsely arrested, or later exonerated.

    Then they'll want DNA to get a driver license.

    Then they'll collect all DNA voluntarily given for medical purposes.

    Then they'll want DNA voluntarily given for family history purposes.

    Then they'll take DNA from children receiving vaccinations. (But the anti-vaxers will be left out!)

    So they'll routinely take DNA from school children entering school. Because it's an important part of their school record! And its for their protection of some kind! And . . . um, Think Of The Children! And, oh, look . . . a Shiny, over there! (But the home schoolers will be left out!)

    They'll routinely take DNA from all newborns. Safely done in the hospital, while the infant is getting other routine shots. (but what about people not born in a hospital! They would not get the benefit of having their DNA on file with the government!)

    Banks will require DNA to get a loan. And to make withdrawals. (but not deposits)

    But don't worry about scope creeps or creepy scopes. None of this DNA will evar be used for any purpose than for which it was involuntarily taken.

    And what to do about people, criminals really, who don't submit their DNA?

    As I said. We will accept it! People will accept anything as long as pot boils slowly enough. We now think the DMCA is normal. We now accept the PATRIOT act as normal. TSA screamers and gropers. The things Trump says would have gotten any other president impeached long ago, if for nothing else, being mentally unfit for office. But if the bar is lowered by inches, there doesn't have to be any bottom to how far it can descend.

    I remember when Sci Fi was an antiseptic, bright, utopian view of the future. Both Alien and Blade Runner seemed shocking, but interesting, in their view of the future. Now dystopia seems the new normal. You can't have Sci Fi without it.

    --
    People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=2, Interesting=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday August 06 2018, @05:13PM (4 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 06 2018, @05:13PM (#717903) Journal

    I remember when Sci Fi was an antiseptic, bright, utopian view of the future.

    Maybe we didn't read the same Sci-Fi. Dune was all about a dystopian inter-stellar society. Foundation all about a dark age, and a possible map through that age to a new age of enlightenment. 1984? That would be utopia for police state fanatics - at least until the fanatics learn that they aren't among the elite.

    Besides - if you ever did discover Utopia, or Paradise, or whatever you want to call it, all you need to do to fuck it up is introduce some humans.

    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday August 06 2018, @05:26PM

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 06 2018, @05:26PM (#717911) Journal

      if you ever did discover Utopia, or Paradise, or whatever you want to call it, all you need to do to fuck it up is introduce some humans.

      That I already realize. I would merely point out an old testament quote from Jeremiah.

      Maybe we didn't read the same Sci-Fi. Dune was all about a dystopian inter-stellar society. Foundation , 1984 . . .

      I had much more limited exposure at a young impressionable age. I did read 1984 and Brave New World in high school, and some other sci fi. Maybe I only think of the stories I liked, or only selectively like the parts that seem like a world that would be worth living in. I started Foundation in the mid 80's but got interrupted and never got back to it. Once I saw how large of a project it was, I wondered if I could invest the time. From what I had read, I thought it would make a great franchise of movies. And that seems to be what Hollywood wants these days. Not a single, stand alone movie, with an actual ending.

      Yes, I definitely realize that outside of fiction, there is no utopia. At least not in this mortal life.

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
    • (Score: 3, Touché) by DannyB on Monday August 06 2018, @05:29PM (1 child)

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 06 2018, @05:29PM (#717917) Journal

      I would also point out that Soylent Green is made from all natural ingredients.

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
      • (Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday August 06 2018, @07:06PM

        by Gaaark (41) on Monday August 06 2018, @07:06PM (#717954) Journal

        would also point out that Soylent Green is made from all natural, Tastes like Pork, ingredients. Mmmmmmmm, pork.

        FTFY!
        :)

        --
        --- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 06 2018, @06:27PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 06 2018, @06:27PM (#717940)

      Personally, I feel the Culture in Iain M. Banks' books is a pretty good candidate for a plausible Utopian society. It of course has its own set of conflict and political and societal problems (otherwise it wouldn't be proper sci-fi) but overall I don't think I could imagine a better place to live. That is, if you're content with machines managing most of society and acting as friendly benevolent dictators.

      I found the optimism a refreshing change from all the dystopias and doom-and-gloom pervading all of today's storytelling.

      Yeah human's suck. We get it. No need to rub it in. No need to wallow in despair. No need to assume we cannot change ourselves to be better than that, given enough time and effort.

  • (Score: 2) by HiThere on Monday August 06 2018, @05:44PM (1 child)

    by HiThere (866) Subscriber Badge on Monday August 06 2018, @05:44PM (#717927) Journal

    Banks won't routinely require DNA to make withdrawals until it's a lot cheaper and faster. Possibly to issue a credit card, though.

    --
    Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
    • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday August 07 2018, @02:40PM

      by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday August 07 2018, @02:40PM (#718259) Journal

      It doesn't have to be cheaper to require it. Just make the customer pay for it. The point of the DNA sample isn't because the bank (nesecelery) wants your DNA, it is simply to erect one more roadblock to getting your money.

      --
      People today are educated enough to repeat what they are taught but not to question what they are taught.
  • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 06 2018, @07:20PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 06 2018, @07:20PM (#717956)

    DNA is already taken from people who are arrested.

  • (Score: 3, Touché) by Thexalon on Monday August 06 2018, @08:44PM

    by Thexalon (636) on Monday August 06 2018, @08:44PM (#717978)

    I remember when Sci Fi was an antiseptic, bright, utopian view of the future.

    Oh, you mean like Brave New World, where the antiseptic, bright, utopian viewpoint was at least challenged?

    --
    The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by realDonaldTrump on Monday August 06 2018, @10:29PM

    by realDonaldTrump (6614) on Monday August 06 2018, @10:29PM (#718012) Homepage Journal

    In High Tax, High Crime California they take babies' blood. They take the cyber of that, they put it in database. And they do scientology with it. And, New York does that too. But, you'll never hear about it from SoylentNews. Because, Sub rejected!!! cbsnews.com/news/california-biobank-dna-babies-who-has-access [cbsnews.com]