Slashdot Mirror
Vast DNA Bank Pits Policing Vs. Privacy
schwit1 writes "Today a Washington Post story discusses the vast U.S. bank of genetic material it has gathered over the last few years. Already home to the genetic information of almost 3 Million Americans, the database grows by 80,000 citizens a month." From the article: "'This is the single best way to catch bad guys and keep them off the street,' said Chris Asplen, a lawyer with the Washington firm Smith Alling Lane and former executive director of the National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence. 'When it's applied to everybody, it is fair, and frankly you wouldn't even know it was going on.'"
But which people are the bad guys is subject to continuous change. Yesterday it was the rapists and murderers. Today it is the filesharers. Tomorrow it is the occasional book reader.
What I find interesting is the term "bad guy". It seems I've been hearing this alot lately. It is like some strange code word, and when that label is applied to someone, they instantly become a target that can be killed, arrested, abused, even tortured without a guilty consciense.
For instance, in numerous television interviews, troops in Iraq talk about bad guys, cops on the street talk about them, inteligence agency agents talk about them etc.
I'm kind of worried, is this the new code word for sub human? For unexplaned threat?
Some say he is made with ascii, others that he is eyeballed daily by millions. All we know is, he is known as the Sig
"'This is the single best way to catch bad guys and keep them off the street,' said Chris Asplen, a lawyer with the Washington firm Smith Alling Lane and former executive director of the National Commission on the Future of DNA Evidence. 'When it's applied to everybody, it is fair, and frankly you wouldn't even know it was going on.'"
In other words, "It's not a crime if you don't get caught." I guess I should start robbing the estates of the dead. They wouldn't know about it, so I guess I should be able to do it. Or actually, no, you idiot. Just because no one knows about it doesn't make it any better. In fact, it makes your actions more cowardly.
A NYC lawyer blogs. http://www.chuangblog.com/
Just because something is fair does not make it good.
I would be greatly interested in a link to just who has had their data collected, and their collection methods. I do not want (and I am far from alone in this) the government keeping tabs on me or archiving my personal habits into some large database that will be used against me in the future. I have never been indicted nor found guilty of any crime and as such there is no reason for the government to retain such information.
Frankly this: "you wouldn't even know it was going on." scares me the most of all.
"This is the single best way to catch bad guys and keep them off the street"
No, the single best way to keep bad people off the street, is to not allow ANYONE onto the street. But that has its drawbacks too...
Am I open minded towards open source, or closed minded towards closed source?
There's a much worse privacy concern.
Did you know that whenever you touch anything with your hand, you leave a unique mark on the thing you touched? This mark can be examined to identify you and track where you've been! Everywhere you've been.
It's a privacy nightmare. Where's the ACLU on this?
Not commenting on whether I think the database is a good or bad idea beyond stating I think it is bad...
I do think that once a profile is done and a unique ID (The 52 digit number mentioned in the article and thread title) is developed that the sample can be destroyed. Concerns about new techniques etc are red herrings - if there is a need to do more with a given individuals DNA in a criminal investigation then the authorities should be able to show probable cause to get a new sample and do the analysis. Keeping a sample in storage is an invitation to abuse of the data.
"and frankly you wouldn't even know it was going on"
And thats EXACTLY why we won't have it.
No, tomorrow it will be any individual who isn't a member of the government or a government-approved corporation.
Sure, you can try and make the argument that DNA will list all of genetic faults while a fingerprint won't, but i think Gattaca is still a long way off and protections can be built into law which will prevent such genetic profiling.
In Gattaca, genetic profiling was technically against the law, but was the de-facto standard way of life regardless of the law.
...when you pry it from my cold dead cells.
The sovereignty of the state ends at my skin. Anyone attempting to force a DNA sample out of me will be dealt with in the same manner I would deal with an attempted sexual assault.
Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
You cannot wash away blood with blood
"When it's applied to everybody, it is fair, and frankly you wouldn't even know it was going on."
If full scale thermo nuclear war killed everyone in the world, it would be "fair." That doesn't make it reasonable or right.
When it's applied to everybody, it is fair, and frankly you wouldn't even know it was going on.
I honestly don't care that my DNA is on file. I want to know however, about programs which are allowed to use this information, and for what purpose. The overwhelming majority of the people in the U.S. are law abiding citizens(unless you go by *IAA standards) and are willing to at least passively assist in protecting their way of life. To some extent, people will act the way you treat them, so if you treat a population like criminals and spying on them, don't be shocked when they start acting like criminals and finding ways to hide things from you.
Requirements for being "land of the free":
... ... ...
* Take thumbprints, photo and install RFID chip on immigrants (check)
* Take DNA and thumbs of every citizen (check)
* Monitor phone calls nation-wide and data transferred over the network (check)
* Big corporation control the government, government controls the people, people control nothing (check)
That's some land of the free you got there, guys.
Finger prints are very hard to fake. Sure, you COULD do it, but DNA is designed to facilitate replication.
A few dollars and a PCR machine, and there's enough DNA to "taint" anything I want. If I already have the DNA, I can frame someone with DNA "evidence" and the current miseducated jury will proclaim the 100% match to be 100% proof.
So you should be worried about databases of DNA. There's no worry about using the DNA itself, just the governmental agencies posessing it. If a court orders I give a DNA sample to test against existing evidence, I can't see the easy ability for abuse (I'm not considering the self-incrimination angle.)
A database is a much different matter.
Looks like Mr. John Doe has finally gone too far. Pull his DNA file, duplicate it in mass, and
spread it around the next dead homeless person you find. Who knew he was socially unbalanced and
liked to kill homeless people? Well, those political activists were always a strange bunch! A
few years in prison will help him sort is out.
When did it become appropriate for the government to own a piece of you? A fingerprint is an external feature, but DNA is a part of you. Ceratinly it will be put to noble uses, but like anything that is available, sooner or later it will also be put to much less than noble uses. That's just human nature.
I know all the Slashdot fanboys are violently against anyone collecting personal information about them without their permission. I can't say I disagree (at a gut-feel level). But set your emotional disgust and fear aside and think about it.
Information collection isn't the problem. Information misuse is the problem.
The problem with the data brokerage industry isn't that they collect data about me (and sometimes get it wrong). The problem is that there's no transparency for consumers into the data kept about them, and no efficient process for them to get inaccuracies corrected. The problem is that companies and the government are often using data (sometimes incorrect) in ways they shouldn't be allowed to.
You just can't stop data collection. It's going to happen, it's already happening, it's been happening. Organizations and people need to collect and exchange information in order for the economy and society to function efficiently and smoothly. Law enforcement needs information to investigate and prosecute wrongdoers. These kinds of informational needs aren't going to magically disappear.
What needs to be stopped it the misuse of data. I should be guaranteed by law the right to completely and freely see, without being charged, at any time, any and all information that any organization, business, or the government has on me, and I should be able to challenge the accuracy of the data and get corrections made in a timely manner. It should be illegal for law enforcement or the government to use data about my legal actions or protected opinions as justification for arresting me, harassing me, publicly smearing me, getting a search warrant against me, or suspecting me of criminal activity. It should be illegal for a lender to deny me a loan based on inaccurate information in my credit report; I should be guaranteed by law an opportunity to prove that the information is wrong and the lender should then be forced to reevaluate using the corrected data. It should be illegal for an employer to not hire me based on information in my credit report or medical records. Etc.
What we need are more accurate and good laws to protect people against the misuse of information. Then the mere collection of data becomes a moot point.
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
What makes me laugh when I see posts SUPPORTING an all out assault on our freedoms, is that they don't realize that by defending the assualt, they are supporting forfeiture of their own rights.
But then I realize I shouldn't get all worked up over the US Government doing this, I need to get worked up over my fellow Citizens who are letting this happen by not voicing Outrage.
Our current Laws, and Judical system (Thanks to the last couple SCOTUS appointments) give the executive branch so much power that they can dismantle our sacred rights.
This isn't a hypothetical, its happening now.
Wake up people.
--
Today a Washington Post story discusses the vast U.S. bank of genetic material it has gathered over the last few years.
Wait...the Washington Post has been gathering genetic material?
Editor Emeritus and Senior Writer, TeleRead.org
Last week I went to buy a pack of smokes and the cashier said there was a new law that requires you to show some I.D. when purchasing cigarettes. I'm 55 w/ grey hair. It's obvious I'm old engough (and dumb enough)to smoke. But she was insistent that I show my I.D. After a couple of days of this, I asked her if there was a camera watching her and she said yes, thats why she has to check.
Seems pretty minor (not to mention creepy) but I beleive it's this constant onslought of new laws that is the most dangerous threat to our freedoms and way of life.
The congress (both federal and state) seem to think you can solve any problem just by passing a bill. And with the current culture of lobbyism/activism not unresaonable to think that eventually everybody will be guilty of something.
Right now we have a wannabe facist administration. What do you think will happen if we get a real one? Should someone dare speak out there would certainly be something they could be arrested on.
It's not even really about the impact new laws have on us today, but how they might be used in the future. Isn't kind of odd that people cussing someone out are now charged w/ making a 'Terrorist Threat'? Or have the baby seat pointing in the wrong direction is 'Child Endangerment' (a felony unless you're Britney Sprears). And of course remember Al Capone was eventually brought down with 'Tax Evasion' charges. You might think he might of deserved it but remember you could someday be on their rader.
Not to mention they're taking all our freedoms by protecting everybodys rights.
R.H.
It'll quit hurtin' once the pain stops.
However, the roots of the word (in it's Nazi context) go deeper than that. It originated in 1922 from the writings of an American named Stoddard who was racist, a WASP and a white supremacist.
From the wiki:
SO, yea, it's relevant that he's "rehashing a small part of the parent post in another language." If you had bothered to look it up (or even just guessed at its Nazi heritage) you would have understood the social commentary being made.
I don't know if the OP knew that the word was originated by an American, but it adds an extra layer of meaning to his short comment.
[Fuck Beta]
o0t!
Will this be yet one more program that is supposed to serve "just one" purpose, that grows and grows?
I agree with the comments above in response to this post.
I don't agree with modding the post troll. If you disagree with a legitimate post counter it with arguments like the posters above, don't try to stifle honest discussion by abusing mod powers.