Over at StatNews is a story on a recent trend where low cost commercial DNA testing is resulting in a number of White Nationalists taking genetic tests, and sometimes they don't like the results that come back.
The article looks at research on how they respond to the sometimes unexpected results:
[...] In a new study, sociologists Aaron Panofsky and Joan Donovan examined years' worth of posts on Stormfront to see how members dealt with the news.
[...] About a third of the people posting their results were pleased with what they found. "Pretty damn pure blood," said a user with the username Sloth. But the majority didn't find themselves in that situation. Instead, the community often helped them reject the test, or argue with its results.
Some rejected the tests entirely, saying that an individual's knowledge about his or her own genealogy is better than whatever a genetic test can reveal. [...] Others, he said, responded to unwanted genetic results by saying that those kinds of tests don't matter if you are truly committed to being a white nationalist. Yet others tried to discredit the genetic tests as a Jewish conspiracy "that is trying to confuse true white Americans about their ancestry," Panofsky said.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @12:05PM (74 children)
They are giving away their most personal info to these genetic testing companies. I thought "white nationalists" would be more appropriately paranoid about stuff like this. I guess I am not really familiar with their positions but I figured distrust of the state would be one.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @12:21PM (41 children)
The true utility of it (and also 'funded' projects like the 'free' Planned Parenthood clinics) is that they provide a way to tie people's personal information to their blood works and other tests, and given the discussions about PP selling 'medical waste' to third parties, that is a lot of genetic material that if it is not anonymized could for instance be used to provide law enforcement with a 'voluntary' database of genetic information for the FBI DNA database non-consensually, but also legally due to the rules surrounding medical waste (For more on this, go read up on the HeLa cell line and how it was commercialized.)
I don't expect White Nationalists (or 98-99 percent of Republicans or Democrats) to be able to wrap their heads around these concerns. And most, being authoritarian apologists will simply tell you they have nothing to hide so why should they be concerned.
The irony for white nationalists particularly though: The nazis used family records to decide who (including/besides the Jews) should be rounded up for deportation/purging. Voluntarily providing your DNA in this fashion is creating a paper trail for the next generation of purges. Say white nationalists WERE to take over the government. As a white nationalist of impure heritage, where do you think you will stand when they start rounding up the Kikes, Sand Niggers, Niggers, Spics, Slant eyes, and Mongrels?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @01:28PM (7 children)
I'd like to see some proof or evidence for your claims because you seem to not be aware of HIPAA nor that your protections under it were not eroded by the ACA.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Friday August 18 2017, @02:20PM (4 children)
What does HIPPA (mere legislation which can be voted away, not a Constitutional protection (for all those are worth)) have that makes it capable of standing up against a pure power play? You think some mid-level hospital administrator is going to give his or her life to valiantly and futilely protect your medical records against cops who'll just shoot right through that copy of HIPPA?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @07:24PM (3 children)
What does some island [openstreetmap.org] have to do with it? GP was taking about HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @07:55PM (2 children)
^^
That is what the concern needs to be. As I said, go read up on HeLa cell line for the most well known example. Combine that with involuntary DNA extraction (There was some documented examples of this during the late clinton/early bush years in Texas. Feds were getting DNA samples from newborn children at the hospital without the parents consent.)
ACA is one way of 'legitimizing' that activity by claiming since the feds helped pay for your medical care they recieve access to your medical records (Which I will note HIPPA only involves disclosure of to non-government 3rd parties. Go read it, there are already exceptions!)
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @08:31PM (1 child)
I still don't see what this all has to do with a Canadian island.
Are you talking about crustaceans [wikipedia.org] maybe? Are the lobster people up to no good again?
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Sunday August 20 2017, @11:40PM
Don't be a retard.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday August 18 2017, @03:11PM (1 child)
HIPAA? WTF good is that when they're running the shit on networked computers running Windows XP?
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @08:26PM
...and that's before mentioning the actual breeches.
10 HIPAA breaches [healthcareitnews.com]
HIPAA data breaches climb 138 percent [healthcareitnews.com]
more [google.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Troll) by VLM on Friday August 18 2017, @01:52PM (30 children)
I'm just sayin, there's at least three diametrically opposed stories going on, what non-white-nationalists think white nationalists think, what actual white nationalists think, and what historical groups decades or centuries thought that no one believes now.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday August 18 2017, @04:20PM (20 children)
I dunno man, today's Nazis are still saying what yester-decade's Nazis did, y'know "Blood and Soil" and all that. There's not really much nuance here, and even the supposedly subtle aspects of the white nationalist agenda still basically break down to "I'm ignorant of history and DEY TERK ERR JHERBZH!"
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 5, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Friday August 18 2017, @07:16PM (4 children)
I dunno man, today's Nazis are still saying what yester-decade's Nazis did
They've also committed 62 acts of terrorism since 2001 (compared to 23 by Islaminsts during the same time). [gao.gov]
When are white people going to admit they have a terrorism problem?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @07:53PM (1 child)
Oh plenty of white people are aware, but a large segment of the population tries to play it down.
I mean just look at the comments in this story and others that involve this shit, so many apologists and attempts to project the blame on to the victims of these white supremacy groups. Undoubtedly part of the reason why these groups also hate Islam so much, they see their own hatred reflected at them. As is common for humans they don't want to see their own darkness so they project it outwards and blame others. Whatever keeps them from having to deal with whatever psychological problems led them down the path of hate and fear.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 19 2017, @12:19AM
Muslims kill people multiple times; right-wingers cry "ban muslims!", lefties cry "not all muslims!"
One white-nationalist kills one civilian; lefties cry "ban white nationalists!", right-wingers cry "not all white nationalists!"
Six of one, half-dozen of the other.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @09:00PM
God, what massive faggotry. Conveniently ignore the fact that muslims commit deadly attacks of terror EVERY SINGLE DAY, the overwhelming majority of which are in their own hellhole countries so you don't count them. Then realize that 50 years of "white nationalist" terrorist attacks combined have a body count of less than one day of Muslim slaughter. You America-hating retards will do ANYTHING to achieve your goal, no matter how many dirty statistics like these you have to churn out.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Saturday August 19 2017, @02:58AM
Not exactly.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/05/lies_damn_lies_and_islamic_terrorism_statistics.html [americanthinker.com]
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by curunir_wolf on Friday August 18 2017, @07:17PM (14 children)
I want to point out a couple of striking similarities between the rally that happened, the guy who ran his car into people and the Ukrainian revolution in 2013/2014.
A couple things you can look up for your self:
First off the guy who ran his car into people, Fields was part of a group that was in white shirts and tan pants with shields, you can see that group marching down the street in Charlottesville yesterday chanting blood and soil.
Why are they chanting blood and soil? It’s a weird thing to chant, well blood and soil is the slogan and flag of the Ukraine insurgent army. The Ukraine insurgent army was a group of people who collaborated with the Nazis in world war 2, it’s not just Hitler.
The Ukraine connection here is very clear, they have a red and black flag, look up Ukraine insurgent army, you’ll find that’s what they were chanting. The torch march is also something that the Svoboda party did in Ukraine, the blood and soil flag you can see it in the Euromaidan in the Ukrainian coup that was sponsored by Obama, Hillary Clinton and George Soros.
All of this stuff where Hillary Clinton and John McCain are saying that they don’t like Neo-Nazis, yes they do. They love them in Ukraine, John McCain is on stage with them, the US supported the Neo-Nazis in Ukraine.
What purpose did the Neo-Nazis serve in Ukraine? What happened was they took a peaceful protest and they turned it violent and that kicked off a coup that got Yanukovych out. This was 2014 in Ukraine, the US media covered it up, none of this is conjecture, do the research yourself, this is what happened.
I am a crackpot
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @07:59PM (9 children)
That makes no sense, why would the US help the Russians take over part of Ukraine? Got any sources, copies of said images etc.?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by curunir_wolf on Friday August 18 2017, @08:21PM (8 children)
You'll need to brush up a bit on Russian / Ukraine history, they weren't helping the Russians, who never "took over" any part of Ukraine. Without going into speculation about US or CIA involvement, the 2014 revolution was a coup to oust the Russia-friendly Ukrainian government. The Wikipedia has some decent coverage of it [wikipedia.org].
Here's some coverage from Salon [salon.com]
talking about McCain's ties with the Svoboda party.
I didn't find a lot of pictures, but there's one on this page [wordpress.com]. The flag is red and black - "blood and soil", get it?
I am a crackpot
(Score: 3, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Friday August 18 2017, @08:33PM (5 children)
Russians, who never "took over" any part of Ukraine
They annexed Crimea! [wikipedia.org] WTF are you talking about?!
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday August 19 2017, @01:03AM (2 children)
Crimea's population is 65% Russians [wikipedia.org]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 19 2017, @05:45AM (1 child)
Australia's population is 33.5% Australians. [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Saturday August 19 2017, @11:52PM
It's still the highest percentage on that list.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2, Disagree) by DeathMonkey on Saturday August 19 2017, @07:19AM
Ok, "Disagree" with a Wikipedia summary with Four hundred and nine citations! [wikipedia.org]
Not that additional citations will work; but, here's Fox News in case you think it's some kind of liberal conspiracy:
Gatherings mark anniversary of Russia's annexation of Crimea [foxnews.com]
(Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Sunday August 20 2017, @12:48PM
You're paying too much attention to the lying CNN and western, NATO-supporting media. There was no “land grab” involved in Crimea. At least not since 1783 when Catherine II ousted the Turks and declared Crimea to be part of Russia: Crimea has been the base of the Black Sea Fleet ever since. It is also a major centre of Russian shipping because of its deep warm water ports. There were no major troop movements to Crimea in 2014, because they were already there. The major troop movements were all concentrated on the Ukrainian border further north in anticipation of an invasion of east Ukraine, which was in the end deemed to be unnecessary.
There are two reasons there was such a heavy military presence in Crimea for most of the communist era. Firstly those ports command the Black Sea and Russia has no other warm water ports other than thousands miles away on the Pacific. Those ports had to be protected at all costs and that is why many of the largest battles in Russian history have been fought in Crimea. Secondly, the people of Crimea tended to be fiercely Tsarist. They supported the monarchy. Crimea became a stronghold for White Russian forces and anti-communist activity during the civil war, but they very much considered themselves to be Russian patriots. The communists never quite trusted Crimeans.
In 1954, Nikita Khrushchev agreed to allow a power sharing arrangement between Russia and Ukraine over Crimea, to allow Ukraine access to those same ports. This was an easy concession for him to make given that the government in Kiev was in his pocket anyway and given a large permanent Russian military presence in Crimea, and further given that the majority of Crimeans are Russian with no loyalty to Ukraine. But in the giant game of chess that constituted the inner workings of the party, Khrushchev had reason to want Ukraine to have some influence in the Crimea region. Khrushchev had risen to power within the party of the Ukrainian SSR. He was a long standing leader of the Ukrainian communist party. Ukraine was his power base politically.
But crimea was never part of Ukraine. Crimea has been Russia since before Ukraine even existed. The state now known as Ukraine was cobbled together by the Bolsheviks in the early 1920s using a mish-mash of old Hapsburg and Polish territories and throwing in some Russian ones too. That is why the majority of the population of Ukraine east of the Dnieper are Russian. The Dnieper used to mark the boundary between Russia and Poland and Austria / Hungary. The communists deliberately included Russian territories into Ukraine because they sought to “russify” it.
You cannot “annex” part of your own country. Just for perspective; Crimea has been part of Russia longer than California or Oklahoma or Ohio have been part of the United States.
In 2014, Ukrainian forces were ejected from Crimea for obvious reasons. Ukraine was courting NATO with plenty of encouragement from the United States. There was no way that Russia was going to tolerate NATO in Ukraine and I was surprised that Putin did not take the whole of East Ukraine back. Russia pulled its troops out of Ukraine in the early 1990s without a shot being fired. There were two strings attached. First that Ukraine returned all nuclear weapons which it did. Second that Ukraine sign an undertaking not to join any military alliance and not to allow foreign troops on its soil, which it did. This treaty was torn up by Ukraine, not Russia.
So Putin did his duty as Russian president. He protected Russia’s security from a clear threat by a hostile force. He did so quickly, reluctantly and as peacefully as possible and his ratings went through the roof in Russia for the way he handled it.
The referendum in Crimea about cutting ties with Ukraine permanently, was an easy one for Putin. The Crimeans already considered themselves Russian. They had never had a problem with Ukraine in the past, but now there were scary right-wing militias patrolling the streets of Kiev, ethnic Russians being bullied and beaten and burned out of their homes; and they didn’t want it spreading. Politicians don’t hold referenda unless they know they are going to win. There was no way Putin was going to lose that one and he knew it. It is funny though how all the high-minded talk about respect for democracy suddenly goes quite in the US media when people have the audacity to vote in a way that inconveniences America.
Putin was keeping a massive hostile and increasingly aggressive military alliance away from one of the most important regions of Russia. It is also to ignore NATO provocation in Europe and to ignore Russian history. They do not sit comfortably with foreign military alliances building up on their borders, for obvious reasons. NATO is openly anti Russian and it has been baiting Russia relentlessly for decades. Russia gave up Eastern Europe peacefully but only on agreements that NATO would not be allowed in.
The same thing happened with Georgia. Saakashvili also bought the NATO snake-oil. He was dumb enough to think that if he sent some troops to support the Americans in Iraq then NATO would support him against Russia. NATO did what it always does. It gave him weapons and encouraged him to go ahead and have a go at Russia; it gave him vague promises of support and then abandoned him as Russian tanks came rolling over the border. Russia had absolutely no interest in Georgia until Saakashvili succeeded in getting NATO to accept Georgia as a NATO “Member in Waiting” at the Bucharest Summit in 2008.
That was when Russia became interested in Georgia again; for one reason and one reason only — NATO aggression. The War in Georgia was not about Ossetia or Abkhazia. They were just the excuse. It was about NATO. And once again Russia did what it had to do and left. The people of Georgia overwhelmingly rejected that pompous blundering clown Saakashvili, the first chance they got in 2012. He left Georgia permanently shortly after words because nobody could stand him.
NATO of course must have known that Georgia had no chance in a war against Russia; but it helped Saakashvili to provoke that war anyway, so it could make a martyr out of Georgia and once again begin shrieking about “Russian aggression.” It tried to do the same thing in Ukraine.
Russia created a large buffer zone between Russian and NATO forces in the early 1990s. Unfortunately NATO simply swarmed in and filled it. And they trampled all over that good will and optimism that Gorbachev had created across Europe.
People in the former USSR block were pleased when Russian forces began to pull out of Poland and the Baltics and other Eastern European countries. They hoped that Russia could start to mend fences with their westerly neighbours; that Russia would no longer be considered the bully boy of Europe. But as treaties were torn up one by one and as NATO began pouring in, building their missile bases and military installations along the Russian border, and pointing their guns at Moscow, they began to think Gorbachev had been wrong. They should have kept a hold on Poland.
Since the end of World War Two, Russia has sent troops into Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Afghanistan, Chechnya and Georgia. It was wrong on Czechoslovakia, wrong on Hungary, wrong on Afghanistan and absolutely right on Georgia. Chechnya is still very much a grey area. But all of Russia’s military interventions have been fought in countries on Russia’s borders, and all of them motivated, whether misguidedly or not, by securing those borders.
The United States in the same period has attacked too many countries to mention, all over the world; countries that had never had any power to threaten the United States in any conceivable way. The United States has attacked more sovereign nations than Hitler and Napoleon put to together. Last count the United States had major military bases in sixty countries along with over 160 smaller military installations. Russia has two bases that are not in Russia.
Imagine the people of the USA wake up one day to find that Russian forces are installing missile bases and air bases along the south bank of the Rio Grande; that Russian delegations are also in Ottawa drawing up proposals for an anti-American Russo-Canadian alliance, with a views to installing Russian military bases north of Vermont or Montana; and that Russian forces are also building Naval bases in the Caribbean and that the are holding massive military war games, in conjunction with Mexican, Canadian and Chinese forces right off the coast of California. And of course Moscow is announcing to Russian people that this is being done to contain American aggression!
That is precisely the level of relentless harassment and provocation that Russia has been dealing with from NATO for decades now.
But until those Russian military bases go it a few miles from the Texas border, then it is monumental hypocrisy for the USA or any of its NATO lackeys to accuse Russia of aggression.
I am a crackpot
(Score: 3, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Friday August 18 2017, @08:37PM (1 child)
Here's some coverage from Salon [salon.com]
From that article:
Many surviving OUN-B members fled to Western Europe and the United States – occasionally with CIA help – where they quietly forged political alliances with right-wing elements. “You have to understand, we are an underground organization. We have spent years quietly penetrating positions of influence,” one member told journalist Russ Bellant, who documented the group’s resurgence in the United States in his 1988 book, “Old Nazis, New Right, and the Republican Party.”
Sounds about right...
(Score: 2) by curunir_wolf on Saturday August 19 2017, @12:13AM
I am a crackpot
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @08:21PM
Euromaidan in the Ukrainian coup that was sponsored by Obama, Hillary Clinton and George Soros.
Yeah, Obama loved it so much he kicked 20 Ukrainian officials out of the country [biharprabha.com] over it.
(Score: 1, Redundant) by DeathMonkey on Friday August 18 2017, @08:25PM (2 children)
Ah yes, the party of "personal responsibility" blaming the left for a rightwinger murdering a girl. Keep it classy!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @09:19PM (1 child)
At the exact same day, a black guy killed 3 women with a hammer in a horrific bloody scene.
Since it wasn't a racist attack by your worst enemy, white people, it barely even made the news.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @10:04PM
Murder = bad
Ideological murder = worse
I think we have a few hundred years of violence against minorities that drastically weights the importance here. There is relatively little true anti-white sentiment going around, but there is a metric shit-ton of anti-nazi sentiment. It just so happens that nazis tend to be overwhelmingly white.
Get off your high horse bud, stop trying to compare the two problems. It just makes you look like an apologist who simply can't stand that the hate and derision has been correctly targeted against your nazi scum friends (I presume, but perhaps you're just stupid and angry about racism against whites not being as big of an issue as racism BY whites)
(Score: 3, Insightful) by aristarchus on Friday August 18 2017, @05:42PM (5 children)
As a non-white nationalist who thinks that VLM thinks what white-nationalists think, I think that we should get VLM tested. Screen for Lyme and Mange at the same time. I hear that CRSPR can now edit out defective genes, so there may be hope for those with this defective white nationalist gene.
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Friday August 18 2017, @07:06PM (4 children)
When you say...
...do you mean that you are a nationalist of an unspecified color other than white, or that the traits of 'whiteness' and 'being a nationalist' are mutually exclusive for you. If the latter, I suggest a second hyphen: 'non-white-nationalist'
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday August 18 2017, @07:28PM (3 children)
non-nationalist-Grecian
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Friday August 18 2017, @08:16PM (2 children)
Olive-skinned non-nationalist?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 19 2017, @01:16AM (1 child)
Or was it...
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Saturday August 19 2017, @02:39AM
You are aware, Oh AC of splendiferous frills, that Spanish and Latin, while related, are two separate languages? Maybe you were looking for "mulieris meretricis", but then the saying would still make no sense, as it would persist in lacking a verb.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Friday August 18 2017, @07:04PM (2 children)
I guess what white nationalists actually say and do has no bearing?
You'd think getting a result like that might make them stop and think about their position. But nah, that test they paid good money is totally fake.
Makes you wonder why they would pay for a fake test in the first place...
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @09:01PM (1 child)
There was a high-profile event in 2013, and because there is video of it, that is often trotted out in this context.
White supremacist on a TV show goes nuts when it's revealed that he's 14 percent African.[1] [google.com]
If I'm extrapolating correctly, it was the show that paid for the test.
[1] ...and according to the latest anthropology of which I am aware, all hominids are "out of Africa".
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Saturday August 19 2017, @03:05AM
Actually per the latest DNA studies, it's starting to look like humans originated in central Asia, with an early branch migrating into Africa, rather than the other way around.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Saturday August 19 2017, @02:34AM
First they came for the white nationalists of impure heritage, and I did not speak out -- because ... uh ...
(Score: 2) by driverless on Saturday August 19 2017, @11:42AM
Nobody expects the White Nationalists! Amongst our weaponry are such diverse elements as: bigotry, racism, an almost fanatical devotion to the Trump (and vice versa), and nice white uniforms with pointed hats.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday August 18 2017, @12:24PM (4 children)
Stuff like facial recognition data tends to be hoovered up into law enforcement databases and you expect the same to happen with genomes. That would make it harder to get away with a crime (and you probably have or will commit one as a torch bearer). But it could also allow you to be framed for a crime in the future. Someone can access your genome, synthesize it, which will be cheaper over time, and amplify it using PCR or by cloning synthetic cells with your genome in them. Then plant the evidence as desired. Bonus if you can account for telomere lengths and other loose ends to make it more convincing.
Then you have insurance companies and employers. The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Privacy Act [wikipedia.org] is in effect, but there was an attempt this year to amend it to allow employers to obtain genetic test results. It could be weakened later, or insurers could just ignore it and use genetic data in coverage decisions, and pay a trifling settlement to the government later. Now I don't what impact that will have in the long term since there's only so much discrimination an insurer can do by genome and it doesn't account for environmental factors. And if regenerative medicine and gene therapy take off, the health game is going to change tremendously anyway. But there will be at least a couple of decades where having your genome known will not help you in anyway, since quantifying risks will be much easier than developing targeted gene therapies.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Friday August 18 2017, @03:22PM (3 children)
You raise an interesting point with repercussions for standards of evidence in a court of law. If you can more easily fake video evidence, will it still suffice as proof of a crime? If you can synthesize and plant DNA at the scene of a crime, can it still be used as proof? Will we move to requiring video footage from multiple smartphones to remove 'reasonable doubt,' or will eye witnesses become the deciding factor?
Justice has taken a lot of knocks in the last couple of years with cops murdering blacks and planting evidence and such. What you're positing could pull the rug out from under it entirely.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Friday August 18 2017, @03:56PM (2 children)
There are multiple studies that shows that witnesses are extremely unreliable.
So there's not much left. Perhaps correlation?
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Friday August 18 2017, @07:11PM (1 child)
Data forensics will become a courtroom staple. Experts will testify as to the veracity of video evidence, and eventually DNA evidence. There are already such experts, of course, but their testimony will adapt to the new challenges. It will be the same as it is now, with different standards.
That is to say, there will be evidence faking and corrupt experts in the future, just as we have now.
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @08:07PM
Acting as big brother and meting out arbitrary justice to us all. How many clones do you have left, comrade?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @01:44PM
It's OK.
They are president now.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday August 18 2017, @03:09PM (7 children)
Someone really should remind them that white people (Or indeed anyone but purely sub-saharan Africans) aren't even 100% human. They all have ~1-5% neanderthal DNA in them.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @03:22PM (2 children)
Given current events, I'd wager the percentage is considerably higher in certain demographics...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @09:25PM (1 child)
You mean the ones that both look and act like apes: black people?
Of course not! That would be wasict! Extwemely wacist!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @10:35PM
There's some evidence neanderthals were fair-skinned. For one, they tended to occupy northern latitudes where dark skin can deprive one of vitamin D.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday August 18 2017, @03:22PM (2 children)
Also Denisovans.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Friday August 18 2017, @03:58PM (1 child)
In what direction will the qualities of a human go when mixed with:
A) Neanderthal
B) Denisovans
..?
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday August 18 2017, @04:54PM
Well, the Neanderthals appear to have contributed resistance to certain kinds of diseases, and the Denisovians are attributed with providing the ability to live at high altitudes. We don't really have very complete information, of course, but those two particulars seem well established.
The thing is, we really don't have any complete genetic maps of either Neanderthals or Denisovians. We've got fragmentary maps from a few individuals, many of whom were probably closely related. And we also don't know how much variation there was. (Preliminary evidence seems to show that at least at certain periods the population didn't have much variation...but that's quite preliminary.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 20 2017, @02:31PM
Neanderthals were humans. Just a different sub-species of human to homosapiens.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @04:10PM (10 children)
You assumed that the white nationalists got some kind of intelligence. The truth is that they are the dumbest of the people. This is why they believe the stupid propaganda they are spreading. An intelligent person would not believe their bullshit. So, fools they are on all levels.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday August 18 2017, @04:25PM (8 children)
Their problem is low WIS more than low INT. I've actually seen some very, very intelligent alt-right types, like Steve Bannon. The man's mind is brilliant, but to borrow from Pterry, it's a broken, crazed, fractured brilliance, like a shattered mirror in pieces on the ground.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Friday August 18 2017, @05:47PM (7 children)
No. WIS comes from experience ultimately. You can have very conniving and smart White Supremacists like Bannon. Which, at this point, let's drop the fucking pretense. It's not White Nationalists anymore, but White Supremacists, and all about the fear of White Culture losing power. Which could very well lead one to conclude that they are stupid, and certainly easy to tack on a lack of wisdom. However, it's not about either. Alignment is where they've gone wrong. Chaotic Evil or Ordered Evil. That's their problem.
They're nothing but trolls, literally, with black hearts filled with hate for anything not them.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday August 18 2017, @06:19PM (6 children)
I'd have to agree there. I'm a very strong Neutral Good temperament, and my type hates Lawful Evil above all else for what ought to be obvious reasons. The purpose of Law is to show the Good for those who lack the willpower, intelligence, or character to do it themselves, so those who pervert the Law are my mortal enemies.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @10:09PM (2 children)
Hate to break it to you, but you might, just MIGHT be a nerd.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday August 19 2017, @01:17AM
Oh hell yes I'm a nerd. I've spent the last almost quarter-century dirty to the elbows inside computers. That's longer than some marriages last.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 19 2017, @03:30AM
Guilty and proud of being a <blink>NERD</blink>.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 19 2017, @04:25AM (2 children)
Lawful, Good, Evil?
I will remind you that all these concepts are at best relative, at worst exceedingly nebulous and, irrespective, at all times subject to change, humans being such 'fickle' creatures.
'Your 'Good' may not be my 'Good' but my 'Evil' and vice-versa. Your 'Good' today, may not be the same as your 'Good' yesterday, or a week's time, I can tell you from experience that my current ideas of 'Good' as someone in my mid-50s are radically different from my ideas of what I thought constituted 'Good' as a teenager.
As to Law, I must take issue with
No, that is your somewhat personal naive idealisation, 'Law' as implemented by legal systems around the world has absolutely nothing to do with any of these concepts, spend some time at 'the wrong end' of it some time, you'll discover that the instruments of your 'Law' care not how 'Good', or 'intelligent' you are, 'Law' is a juggernaut cobbled together by committee which doesn't give one flying fuck about these 'qualities' you mention and will especially flatten you if you get in its path and try relying on them as a defence.
And, sorry to say, this 'Law' designed to control the masses trumps your personal 'Law'.
Here's a couple of things, what passes for the 'Real' world isn't a fantasy novel and you are not some sort of knight in shining armour, please bear these in mind when you finally do 'venture forth' out there.
--
'There are no eternal facts, as there are no absolute truths.' – Friedrich Nietzsche: Human, All-too-Human'
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 19 2017, @09:25AM
NO, you will not. Do not you think we are already familiar with all the alt-right rhetoric, and have not stuck up back up their own anuses? Do you knot gnow that in order for a concept to be relative, it must be relative to some fixed point, that by definition is not relative? Or did you gnot know that figs grow on fig trees, and that these figs are in fact the sexual organs of these trees, and when you ingest these figs, your excrement serves the purpose of the fig tree, not you or your sorry outlaw gang of autoeroticism wankers? Think before you dump, would this be a good place for a fig tree?
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday August 19 2017, @03:44PM
You're taking this, er...a wee too seriously, dude. And most of what else you say is pretty far off the mark too; i know moral realism is passe these days, but I do believe I've found a plausible supporting framework for it. And no, it doesn't imply moral Platonism, or even deontology.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @06:26PM
Perhaps it's the inbreeding
Gotta stay white somehow.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by meustrus on Friday August 18 2017, @06:02PM (6 children)
White nationalists have always expected - and received - special treatment from the government. Look at what the police did in Charlottesville: total hands off approach. Compare that to the history of virtually every left-wing protest over the last 70 years.
A huge part of this is the part of their ideology that is based in fact: white people are the ones in power. This is of course something we all agree upon (and disagree as to whether that's a good thing). And its impact is pretty plain: white people protesting in support of white issues enjoy a level of protection jarringly different from everyone else. The feds aren't exactly inventing the SWAT team to illegally assassinate the leader of the KKK the way they murdered the leader of the Black Panthers.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @06:53PM (1 child)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Nazi apologists who try and whitewash (haha) the issue often have zero clue about how abusive the government has been, and how much special treatment they are receiving for being white. Racist militias are allowed to exist without problem, but the Black Panthers were harassed by the highest levels of federal gov. For fucks sake we've got Nixon and one of his compatriots flat out admitting they pushed policies as part of a race/culture war!!!
We must address this underlying issue, it is a lot bigger than people think and not limited to a few thousand crazy nazi fuckers. It extends outward in a massive black cloud that slowly fades into clear skies, those stuck in the foggy boundary areas are the "states rights!" apologists. Plenty of state's rights people are not racist, but there is a good deal of overlap between the two groups.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday August 18 2017, @11:52PM
If you ever should want a clue, I'd start with finding out when those events happened in. For example, slavery was ended a bit over 150 years ago. The Black Panthers' issues with unjust law enforcement harassment really were from 40-50 years as was the terms of Nixon. It's either clueless or dishonest to pretend that nothing has changed since.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by number6x on Friday August 18 2017, @08:51PM (3 children)
two points you might find interesting...
1) Had a dog. He was all white. I named him Newton. Only one neighbor caught on and used to call the dog "Huey P."
2) "over the last 70 years"... Greater than 70 years. Haymarket square was May 1st, 1886. It is now strongly suspected that it was the cops who threw the bombs.
(In 1886 Chicago, 'cops' weren't really what you think of as police today. Most were more like hired thugs who worked for local political bosses. The communist holiday of May Day is in memory of the Haymarket square event.)
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @10:27PM
Actually, the proper characterization would be "workers' holiday".
...and, unless my knowledge base is lacking, it's only the USA that doesn't have parades and such on that day.
USA.gov, instead, came up with Labor Day (in September) where the parades have military men and equipment, celebrating Imperialism and Capitalism (bosses), apparently.
...and, under the heading of songs you -won't- hear on "Labor" Day, there's "Which Side Are You On?" and "Joe Hill", among others. [googleusercontent.com] (orig) [latimes.com]
Noting here that FDR was often called a Socialist (though he was VERY MUCH Pro-Capitalist and, in fact, saved Capitalism), there's Ain't Done Nothin' If You Ain't Been Called A Red [google.com]
...and, under the heading of topics you -won't- hear on "Labor" Day, there's reclaiming The Wagner Act (The National Labor Relations Act of 1935)--which was gutted by Repugs and Dumbocrats in 1947 via Taft-Hartley, among a number of topics. [googleusercontent.com] (orig) [counterpunch.org]
You won't hear how Organized Labor could get back its mojo through outreach. [googleusercontent.com] (orig) [counterpunch.org]
You especially won't hear how, without unions, wages would plummet. [googleusercontent.com] (orig) [counterpunch.org]
(Free-Riders take note.)
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 19 2017, @12:44AM (1 child)
No, that's exactly how I think of the police today.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday August 19 2017, @04:34AM
Aye, I think maybe, just maybe, he was being a wee bit sarcastic there...
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @12:10PM (3 children)
This is presented as if it is abnormal but honestly it is typical human behaviour. Find someone who believes a process roughly similar to the Armitage-Doll model explains cancer (slow accumulation of very low rate genetic errors in a single cell). Then show them that age-specific incidence peaks at around 50-70 for many cancers (you can get data for free from SEER). They will find any way to "explain away" that peak to save their model of what is going on (the age data in the elderly is unreliable, etc).
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Friday August 18 2017, @12:24PM (2 children)
I'm not saying that model is true (I don't think it is), but I don't see how a peak around an age of 50-70 contradicts that model. It would just indicate that it typically takes 50 to 70 years to accumulate enough defects for those cancers.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @12:27PM
The aging process itself is an accumulation of genetic defects that were not weeded out by natural selection because they impact the individual past the reproductive age.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @02:19PM
Yes, but the error rates (usually ~10^-8 per bp/division each) are too low for it to peak so early. That is why in the original paper they say the probability of accumulating n mutations occurring at rate p by* time t is (I am setting p_1 = p_2 =... = p_n here for simplicity):
This is instead of using (more computationally intensive) geometric distribution:
If you check, you'll see the approximation A ~ B works only for low mutation rates (p [much less than]1):
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2007940/ [nih.gov]
They never consider that the assumption that p [much less than] 1 is incorrect, instead coming up with all sorts of other explanations:
https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/33/6/1182/866607/Commentary-Fifty-years-of-the-multistage-model [oup.com]
*Note that we are working with the cdf here, to compare to age specific incidence you need to get the pdf (first derivative or first finite difference of the cdf, or in the case of the approximation multiply by p*dt for the probability of getting the last mutation in interval dt).
(Score: 3, Interesting) by kaszz on Friday August 18 2017, @12:38PM (16 children)
People have a complex web of ancestry given enough of generations. In the past the society was more chaotic and so ancestry becomes such too. The thing people has to keep in mind is what genes that matters! and then there's phenotype modifications that alter the use of those genes. And some aspects only becomes present if activated by the environment and so on.
And the knowledge of how genes, phenotype and environment works is not well known at this time. Just some basics.
Being absolutely sure that gene X predicts event Y with absolute certainty is currently a fool's errand.
Sending in gene samples with your correct name seems foolish. Fake something?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by VLM on Friday August 18 2017, @01:45PM (13 children)
That was something very carefully not discussed in the normie news but directly on topic I have read some interesting comments along the lines of its sort of a big machine learning project, and intermarriage was not invented by hollywood in the 1960s.
So horrifically brutalizing the science of genetics for simplicity, due to intermarriage lets say your code is 3897910563. And the sequence 791 is associated with BOTH race A and race B in location Q due to intermarriage 3000 years ago. Theres a chicken and egg puzzle WRT where sequence 791 originally came from. All they can say today is stuff like 40% of people calling themselves race A have 791 and 37% of people calling themselves race B have sequence 791.
More concretely I've read claims from people that do the DNA test that anyone with eastern euro ancestry gets a small percentage of Jewish ancestry for this effect. What is the racial source of sequence 791? Who knows.
Eventually I'll probably get around to doing this, but genealogy is a low priority hobby and I've been blowing money on US Army veteran research for my ancestors in the (first, so far) civil war and (first, so far) revolutionary war. Also I already know I have ancestors in Scotland, Ireland, Germany, via immigration info and even ship passenger lists, so DNA isn't really useful in my case. If like, someone was an orphan and had no idea where to even start, or there is no ability to research at all, well, at least you know you're kinda sorta from somewhere. Eventually all genealogy research hits a dead end and DNA is for people who have roughly nothing, so anything being better than nothing...
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @02:45PM (3 children)
> normie news
What the actual fuck.
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Friday August 18 2017, @04:02PM (2 children)
The actual fuck is that normie news is usually devoid of important facts and sometimes with distorted facts.
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Friday August 18 2017, @07:20PM
Symptoms include sound bites, teaser headlines, and certainty of results. Probably also local tie-ins and anecdotes...
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @08:24PM
Abbynormal! Abnormal news! Brietbarf brain-damaged news! Not fake at all "catapulting the propaganda" abbynormal news! Got to wonder about whites who are "abnormal" and take pride in that. Maybe they can start a "Special White Olympics"? I noticed that they already have a short white bus for David Duke to ride in!
(Score: 2) by kaszz on Friday August 18 2017, @04:07PM (1 child)
A sequence can occur through genetic mishaps, be it inflammation, entropy, wrong pH etc. Another entry point are virus, bacteria or fungi etc. These can then be mixed with other sequences.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday August 18 2017, @05:30PM
Not sure about your point, but that's definitely true. Somehow pea plants ended up with hemoglobin in their root nodules. A bacterial infection mediated by viral transmission from some mammal is about the only plausible mechanism.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Arik on Friday August 18 2017, @04:17PM (6 children)
Leaving aside the poor choice of words (they're populations not 'races' ffs) this is accurate. It's also incomplete. Intermarriage is one way this can happen but it's certainly not the only one, especially if we're talking (as it seems clear you were) about tests that read a lot of genes instead of focusing specifically on the ones that are not affected by selection. It might be that your population A and B don't have any common ancestors more recent than ~200k years ago, far less related than any two randomly selected groups should be, and it might be that they haven't lived anywhere near each other in historical times. Yet a half dozen unrelated ancestral sequences, from 792-798, could mutate to 791 in a single step, and this mutation was beneficial in either setting, so that's what they'll both show today.
And there are known examples of this having happened. This is why, for instance, the sickle cell gene is spread so widely. And this is a useful example also because it's the subject of a common myth among racists - that sickle cell is only found among those with African ancestry, and thus is an example of a real racial difference, showing that the underlying concept of race is not a mirage, but is based on science.
Except it's not only found among those with African ancestry. It evolved independently from common base genes in several different spots far far away from each other, both inside and outside of Africa. Places, of course, where people cannot avoid contact with mosquitos - several places in Africa but others far removed. It's likely in the US to be associate with specifically west African ancestry - but that's because we have a lot of people of (specifically west) African ancestry, not because it's the only place that gene can possibly come from.
The genes involved with lactase persistence are a very similar case. That trait has clearly evolved independently in several different populations from a common base, it has an obvious practical benefit that causes it to spread like wildfire among herdsmen, it should never be used as an indicator of deep ancestry. Yet I see it used that way all the time.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday August 18 2017, @05:35PM (1 child)
But if I understand correctly the separate evolution of lactase persistence in some of the populations used a different mechanism than in other populations. I forget whether there were two or three different mechanisms, but they weren't all the same mutation, they just had the same effect. And I wouldn't be surprised if the same were true for the evolution of sickle cell.
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Arik on Friday August 18 2017, @09:03PM
That is correct, and why the 'but?' That is completely consistent with what I said and in fact serves itself as proof of its correctness! The fact that it's not always done in exactly the same way shows clearly that it has multiple origins and therefore has to be disqualified as an indicator of deep ancestry. (And even if it did have a single origin, the fact that it's so clearly susceptible to selection would do the same thing - so this is doubly disqualified.)
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by VLM on Saturday August 19 2017, @01:44PM (3 children)
I think a lot of the trouble is the same english language words are used for CSI matching which is close enough to 100% accurate, and for hand wavy "your genes vs the average gene over there" which has the simplistic explanation of "you're from over there" but the accuracy is far less than 100% and the exceptions are vast and interesting.
People have a lot of trouble understanding how the same science and technology and english language words can be near 100% accurate when they say some rando blood sample came from, for example, me, yet be not much better than a wild guess when someone says that blood sample came from Australia (which I'm not from, but I'm told there's enough ethnic Scots in Aus that if I were tested I'd get X% Aus ancestry as a result, despite having genealogical proof nobody in my direct ancestry went to Aus although some cousins certainly did... Essentially I have enough cousins in Aus that my genetic results are close to theirs so a test would give a small percentage chance I'm from Aus, although I actually provably have zero Aus direct ancestors, or flipping the argument, Aus people being related to me means we're related by cousinhood not ancestry but people have a lot of trouble wrapping their heads around that distinction)
(Score: 2) by Arik on Saturday August 19 2017, @04:55PM (2 children)
Yes, I think you're right, people have a hard time understanding that and I can see how it could be confusing. But the difference is in what you're matching against. When you're matching two blood samples, one from the crime scene and one from the suspect, those can be reliably tested against each other, and the results are pretty meaningful. But when you're trying to match a sample, not with another sample, but with geography, the geography cannot be coaxed into providing a blood sample. You're missing the other side of the test.
So what they do is to catalogue a bunch of samples from different areas and map them. (Insert "how to lie with maps" here.) Then they're matching your sample against this statistical database. The validity of the test depends completely on the validity of that database and the accuracy of the assumptions behind it.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday August 21 2017, @02:07PM (1 child)
I thought about it a bit more and the problem boils down to nobody cares about cousins (well, mostly) and everyone cares about ancestors but population DNA testing can't tell the difference. So DNA testing shows I have a lot of cousins in Scotland, Germany, and areas where Scots and Germans have immigrated like Argentina and Australia. However I've done the genealogical research to prove I only have direct ancestors in Germany and Scotland. So merely having cousins in Australia and Argentina does NOT prove I have ancestors there. This is where a lot of confusion is created. I am provably genetically related to Australians and Argentinians, but they're not my individual ancestors.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Monday August 21 2017, @11:37PM
It's far from all though.
When they're looking at genes that are subject to selection, those genes tend to match roughly with climate zones. So this can create apparent 'cousins' that actually don't share any recent ancestors with you, simply because the ancestors of both lived for a long period in a similar climate and some of the same genes were selected for heavily.
Also humankind had a relatively recent population bottleneck. This means we are ALL inbred cousins, in a sense, world wide, if you just go back far enough. This only intensifies the effect of selection, because all human populations start from a very very similar genetic base, as a result of the population bottleneck. You start with a similar genetic base in two places, you subject both populations to similar stimuli (environment) and you may reasonably expect some similar outcomes.
They prove nothing at all ancestry.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Friday August 18 2017, @05:02PM
Most of your point is true, but society is currently MORE chaotic than in the past. This is due to rapid transportation over long distances. Eventually we'll all look Chinese of a sort, and so what. (Mind you, there are several sorts of Chinese, but they resemble each other more than do Western Europeans, because they have a longer history of mixing over a wide area. The resemblance has been studied, and it's not a mere matter of familiarity. The reason is my hypothesis.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Saturday August 19 2017, @01:47PM
Those worried about such things as purity of blood simply go back to an agreeable starting point and move forward from there. Anything that might upset their belief system is considered unreliable data.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @01:26PM (6 children)
They flock, you fleece them
(Score: 5, Funny) by GreatAuntAnesthesia on Friday August 18 2017, @01:56PM (4 children)
Hmmm....
- Set up business claiming to do different / better genetic testing than the existing companies. Use shell companies / fake names etc to protect from recriminations.
- Charge a lot of money, and market it only on Stormfront / similar sites.
- Take their money and their spit samples. Throw the spit samples straight into the incinerator.
- Return a "You are 100% white!" response for every sample received. Watch as sales go through the roof.
- Donate all profits to anti-racism causes.
- Profit (for society).
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Friday August 18 2017, @03:27PM (1 child)
That's actually genius.
I think they'd want to throw slight but acceptable variation into the mix to maintain believability. For example, tell them they're 100% white but 2% of that is Irish. Then watch the client run out and buy shamrocks to hang on their car mirrors and stuff. 2% Italian, and suddenly watch them proclaiming that the Godfather is their favorite movie.
You could have a lot of fun with that.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Saturday August 19 2017, @01:53PM
If you want to cross the line into genius evil, once the business is successful start privately contacting prominent leaders of such groups and let them know there was a "problem" with their test results which you could "fix" for a modest fee. Otherwise, there might be an "accident" and we could accidentally have those test results slip out to rivals within your group...
(Score: 5, Insightful) by meustrus on Friday August 18 2017, @06:09PM
That would profit you, but harm society. Taking money from white supremacists to tell them they are 100% white makes them more sure of themselves and their extreme political opinions. Giving that money to anti-racism causes validates those causes and make them more sure of themselves and their (much less) extreme political opinions. This is true if even if the cause is legal advocates who uses it to win in court; court victories follow progress rather than creating progress, after all.
Put it all together and you're going to turn more alt-right people into white supremacists and more mainstream liberals into SJWs. Pretty sure that's a net negative for society.
(I'm really not trying to paint a false equivalency here; just pointing out that maaybe the problem is the idea that there are two opposing sides, regardless of how very different they are)
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 2) by Osamabobama on Friday August 18 2017, @07:25PM
This is the essentially the conspiracy they expect from genetic testing. This particular recipe wouldn't really fit the Jewish Conspiracy (tm) they are expecting, but it's close enough in form. Maybe blame it on the Russians...
Appended to the end of comments you post. Max: 120 chars.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 18 2017, @03:32PM
Now if we can just convince them to take IQ tests.