No announcement yet.

Our commitment: We won't share your DNA

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Our commitment: We won't share your DNA

    If this isn't an outright lie, then the word has no meaning.

    This is why consumers have to get politically involved in these issues. There aren't enough alternatives to enforce a market penalty for this kind of scurrilous behavior, and lobbyists are chomping at the bit to reverse what few consumer protections remain. (Spurious accusation removed)

    P.S. I didn't even receive this half-#%% email.

  • #2
    The article says: "“The company needs to either roll back the change or else delete all stored DNA data it has collected from individuals under the previous agreement,” Mr. Butler said." - DO NOT SUGGEST THEY DELETE DATA without permission!!

    Frederator -- I received Bennett's e-mail. If you did not -- Double-check if it went to spam. Then, if not there, double-check which e-mail is listed as primary for your Kit -- AND then check all settings and whatever for it - because the reason it did not arrive is probably due to you, your e-mail server, or your e-mail.


    • #3
      Some people would rather believe the liberal made up news than the truth.


      • #4
        Originally posted by Jim Barrett View Post
        Some people would rather believe the liberal made up news than the truth.
        This bad attitude is why our government is captured by special interests. In fact, both parties have undermined the rule of law for decades. The goal has to be to destroy the machinery of partisan politics, not to privilege one corrupt party over the other.

        I despair of the possibility of effective public oversight when most people are like this, intent on pursuing petty partisan vendettas instead of attacking the accretion of unconstitutional practices (e.g., single seat legislative districts drawn by partisan commissions) that protect politicians and police from accountability.

        It's time to grow up and get serious. How many people are really up to that?


        • #5
          The made up news wants to look for the bad in everything and telling lies. I prefer to look for the good and tell the truth. It makes me a lot happier.


          • #6
            That is exactly how little problems become big problems. Ignoring them doesn't make them better. It's basically just a bet that you will die before it comes to get you, which is a huge insult to the young people who WILL have to deal with them.


            • #7
              I was active duty military, as part of my enlistment process I was fingerprinted. So much for taking up a future life of crime, I'd have to be careful not to leave any fingerprints behind. Further, while in bootcamp they withdrew a whole blood sample for the purpose of it being cryogenically preserved in the event that I should become a POW/MIA and they find my remains some time later and DNA is the only way to verify those are my remains. As happened to a grand-uncle of mine in WW2, by the time they found his plane crash site in the 1980's, all that remained were a few bone fragments, so they obtained a DNA sample from a brother of his to match against. Of course, that means DoD has my (unsequenced) DNA stashed away and it wouldn't take much for it to become sequenced at a future date, with or without my consent.... And they probably have some sequenced DNA data for two of my grand-uncles on file somewhere, as I doubt their results were destroyed afterwards.

              Besides, as the technology advances, and Moore's Law marches on and impacts ever increasing amounts of our lives, I would be unsurprised to discover that DNA sequencing is in some respects, part of the day to day lives of many people. Whether it be their "Smart Toothbrush" monitoring for cancer markers and other early-onset health conditions, to unlocking certain doors/devices,

              Yes, there are horror stories out there already with regards to law enforcement and DNA results that they poorly understood. But the thing that gets missed on this is that with few exceptions(going back to poorly understood science--Getting a court order to do a forensic DNA test on a man because he "had a rare Y-DNA mutation" in common with the Golden State Killer), it wasn't the person who DNA tested who became the suspect, it typically was the untested family members around them who became suspects.

              The ironic twist at this point is more that the best way to protect yourself(and others) from Law Enforcement scrutiny due to DNA evidence if you(and others) are law abiding, is to get DNA tested and ensure they're able to access it.

              Beyond Law Enforcement failing to understand what exactly they're working with in some circumstances(they're not alone in that respect), they're not the real issue at hand.

              The ones that are of concern is Insurance Companies and what they might try to do with DNA Data(to the detriment of their customers, rather than to their benefit--it does cut both ways), or as the understanding of the human genome improves, what employers might try to do in the future with that information.

              The freak out over law enforcement is making a mountain out of a mole-hill in this particular case. I have doubts the EULA would have been able to invalidate any findings a Law Enforcement Agency may have had if they'd simply spoofed a test-kit and uploaded results as a DNA Transfer from another vendor. As FTDNA themselves more or less alluded to(albeit not on the legal end). I'm not a lawyer, but it probably would have made an interesting court case to see it work through the MANY permutations involved. Sure the EULA violation might result in some kind of penalty award, but I personally doubt it would have invalidated the chain of evidence with respect to whomever they caught by violating the EULA and not getting permission from FTDNA first before uploading the kit.

              Now if they announced they had been sharing data with insurance companies, that's another matter.


              • #8
                Instead of foot-printing newborn babies (in the US), will we in the future, go to the next step, and DNA test them?
                Last edited by Biblioteque; 7 February 2019, 01:48 PM.


                • #9
                  In 60 years, I wouldn't be surprised if they were DNA tested before the first trimester was over.


                  • #10
                    Unfortunately, under the current system, it is virtually certain that the very worst thing that you can imagine--and worse yet--is going to happen. There's no way for the public to hold politicians or police accountable. The two parties have gerrymandered the entire country up into safe little sinecures where you only get to choose between 1 of 2 brands. Candidates don't have to actually do anything. All they need is the right party affiliation. Unelected party officials decide who the candidate is going to be behind the scenes. All you do is rubber stamp their choices, and they choose in order to please their corporate sponsors, not to please you.

                    We could talk forever about the scary things that are definitely going to happen to this technology, but it won't mean a thing until people get serious about breaking up the 2 party system. The US today is like the old Soviet Union. We have elections, but they don't mean anything.