One Of The Biggest At-Home DNA Testing Companies Is Working With The FBI

originally posted by: toms54

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: toms54
No one 25 years ago could have foreseen the loss of privacy that exists today.

I disagree... Orwell foresaw it 70 years ago.

He may have but when I told people 20 years ago that phone calls could be searched by computers for key words or voice prints, they seriously thought I was crazy. Project Echelon was called a conspiracy theory.

The phantom sense of privacy is similar to security... many Americans become furious when something scratches their artificial bubble of imaginary security or privacy. Deep down most realize it's all just an illusion... similar to American concepts like property ownership, freedom, and rights, but they successfully lie to themselves and believe "Oh, my data is private" or "We're secure in America against terror attacks by Muslims" or "I own this land and house and at least they can't just take that from me for no reason." IT IS ALL BS. They heard you 20 years ago, and most believed you, but most needed to lie to themselves and believe in that lie, above all else, to maintain their fragile little faux happiness and sense of mental well being. It takes a certain type of person to be pissed off and distrusting at all times, and very, very few have the stuff it takes to survive their life feeling that way.

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: stonerwilliam

You joke, but Animal Farm is quickly approaching soothsayer levels considering how a cadre of wealthy Democrats are now calling for socialism and taxation of the wealthy at asinine levels (taxes which they and their benefactors will certainly avoid). Meanwhile, Nineteen Eighty Four looks like it was presumed to be the blueprint for the modern IC.

The writing was on the wall on animal farm then they edited it just like we have the Mandela effect now , my conspiracy humor

originally posted by: dug88

www.nytimes.com...

In a new study, 74 out of 108 crime laboratories implicated an innocent person in a hypothetical bank robbery

In a new study DNA exonerations have cleared 362 people just through the Inncence project.

www.innocenceproject.org...

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: dug88

www.nytimes.com...

In a new study, 74 out of 108 crime laboratories implicated an innocent person in a hypothetical bank robbery

In a new study DNA exonerations have cleared 362 people just through the Inncence project.

www.innocenceproject.org...

www.scientificamerican.com...

www.sciencenews.org...

I get your point. It does make you wonder though if any of those those people found innocent were in fact actually guilty. Either way, the whole prcoess is questionable at best and honestly it's not just the fbi that this data gets shared with.

www.cnbc.com...

amp.timeinc.net...

The fact is, it's good to understand that when you take these dna tests, your results will be put into a database accessible by third party companies and law enforcement. Many people are likely not aware of this.

Personally i'm not a fan of something with large failure rates being used to decide people's lives period. Whether it does good or bad it's not something that decisions like that should be made on.

originally posted by: dug88

originally posted by: schuyler

originally posted by: dug88

www.nytimes.com...

In a new study, 74 out of 108 crime laboratories implicated an innocent person in a hypothetical bank robbery

In a new study DNA exonerations have cleared 362 people just through the Inncence project.

www.innocenceproject.org...

I get your point. It does make you wonder though if any of those those people found innocent were in fact actually guilty. Either way, the whole prcoess is questionable at best and honestly it's not just the fbi that this data gets shared with.

I'd much rather have a guilty person exonerated than an innocent person made guilty by DNA. And the fact is thousands of people have been exonerated. They weren't all in prison. It seems to me that most of the points in the two articles you linked (which I read. Thanks.) were a result of people who did not understand what a test could do. It is not a failing of the tests as much as it is a failing of understanding. If the tests are that unreliable, let the attorneys learn all about it and argue the fact in court. None of the failings should be supressed.

Now I fully agree that DNA results should not be available commercially and we need strictures in place to make sure that does not happen with penalties in place if it does. But if the FBI manages to nab a killer via DNA submitted by a relative, I really have no problem with that.

The other major point that bears repeating (not that you personally did not get it) is that DNA testing does not depend on an individual taking a test, so it's a false sense of security if people think avoiding it protects them. Just ask my Dad. (Well, you can't, but the point remains.)

a reply to: toms54

Sounds alot like gattaca.

Everyone who donates blood or has blood tests at a doctor's office has already compromised their privacy, most likely. If they wanted your DNA that badly, the medical mafia would have been the perfect collection point, since everyone involved in the medical field is hopelessly corrupt from the word go (exploiting sick (vulnerable) people for profit while claiming to be humanitarians).

Well, I sure wouldn't have given my DNA to Ancestry if I had a family member who was a criminal. Now, it just keeps my family members more honest knowing their close relative's DNA is on file. I may have some kids out there I do not know of, but it is not a problem since I cannot give anyone a name since I do not know they are mine. None have shown up as my kids in ancestry.

a reply to: schuyler

I've been doing DNA testing for years in an effort to expand my knowledge of my family tree and get a handle on my ancestry. About 8 years ago I found out that my father was not my biological sire. At the same time I found out that my mother's father was not her biological sire. Talk about a serious kick in the nuts...

After uncovering these surprising results, I started doing a more in-depth investigation to find out who these men really were. Unfortunately, at the time, genealogical DNA databases were not as extensive as they are now. However, now that these DNA tests have become so inexpensive, the size of those databases has expanded considerably.

I gave my ex-wife an AncestryDNA kit for Christmas in 2017. And I bought one for myself just for giggles because I had taken the 23&Me test long ago and wanted to see how the results compared. To my surprise/horror I found that I was closely related to an old high school crush. Long story short, it turns out that her great-grandfather was my sire. He was a multi-millionaire local business owner that my mother worked for as a house keeper. Having grown up poor, that was another serious kick in the nuts. But at least I now knew the truth.

At the same time, because this testing is now so much more widespread, I was contacted by DNA relatives on 23&Me who had a close match to my mother. From that link I was able to finally determine who my mother's sire was.

The moral of the story is that DNA testing has its place. And I'm glad I participated. On the other hand, now, because of its widespread use, a giant DNA database is being built that will eventually yield some amount of genetic information about everyone; whether they participate directly or not. Only time will tell how far this information will be used for purposes other than genealogical research. There are very few laws that protect our DNA.

-dex

a reply to: toms54

Considering Farcebook was started the DAY Darpa's/pentagons Lifelog program was shutdown by congress it's time to consider the fact that every single tech company out there is a gov shill company started to control the flow of info and circumvent the constitution.

If not outright started by them, they are surely infiltrated by them.

It's getting obvious.

I'm still doing research, but it is starting to look like the auto bailouts were contingent upon installing all the bs onstar/ulink tracking software hardwired into vehicles as well.

This whole trap was paid for by stealing our money.
Probably started with 911 as a diversion cash.

a reply to: rickymouse

Da da?

Is that you

In 2015 i had a thread about this. I wondered who was in charge of the huge database they will eventually have. I also speculated that any time they want to charge someone with a crime of some sort their DNA will just mysteriously appear on a key piece of evidence. Its all way too convenient. And people had to see this coming. There is no way the alphabet agencies could pass up a gold mine of DNA, and for free.

originally posted by: Mandroid7
a reply to: rickymouse

Da da?

Is that you

At least I know that you read my whole post....son

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
In 2015 i had a thread about this. I wondered who was in charge of the huge database they will eventually have. I also speculated that any time they want to charge someone with a crime of some sort their DNA will just mysteriously appear on a key piece of evidence. Its all way too convenient.

Hmmm. I don't know. I don't think the average person would really have too much to worry about in this regard. Why would the government want to charge a random innocent person with a crime?

Now what IS a realistic concern is that if the government (or whomever the people in control of the database or whatever) wanted to manipulate high ranking (or very prominent/influential/powerful people) they certainly could use anything they have at their disposal for that.

However, let's consider a hypothetical. Let's say they wanted to manipulate some guy named Dan who runs a huge company. So they tell Dan that they're going to set him up for a crime he didn't commit if he doesn't do as he's told. That falls apart of Dan goes to the media or publishes their threats on his Twitter or something. Doesn't seem very plausible when you really think about it.

UNLESS.....they threatened people with evidence that is real. For example if Dan committed a crime 10 years ago and he knows he's guilty, they would certainly have him by the balls. However, they would still have the problem that if Dan turns out to just be crazy and goes public with it and says "Yeah! I did it but they're blackmailing me and here's the proof!"

Again, it would be risky for them to actually use something like this because it all depends on the person in question doing what they're expected to do. What if they do the unexpected? What if they just don't care about ruining their own name? Seems like a dangerous game to play, frankly. Not that it could never happen. I just don't think smart people would resort to something like this if they had any alternative. It all falls apart of Dan doesn't care about being ruined or going to jail or losing his wife or job or whatever the consequences are in this hypothetical.

It's not that I don't believe nefarious people would be willing to do this sort of thing. I just don't think they'd do it just to be doing it. Like why would they single out a random person and frame them for murder or something? Now if they KNEW who did the murder and they wanted to put the blame on someone else, I suppose that could be a motive but they'd have to be pretty evil to pin it on some poor random person who knew nothing about it.