We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies • Hacker News Board

Re: We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies

#11

Post by sublinear » Thu, Jun 08, 2023, 2:23 PM UTC

mensetmanusman wrote: post #6

Blood is sampled at birth in America, so we aren't too far away from being able to identify people who litter forever. Just takes one policy change... we are building the cells of a possible future prison.

Unless it's found in the middle of nowhere, and maybe not even then, how does one determine if a piece of trash is there by the deliberate act of littering?

As well, lots of trash has several people's DNA with no one individual having the majority such as product packaging, and that's the most likely to be littered.

Re: We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies

#12

Post by morebortplates » Thu, Jun 08, 2023, 2:28 PM UTC

ehhthing wrote: post #5

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #4

The thing to keep in mind is that that data can't be just be linked automatically to people, they need, as the article says to "compare these sequences to public genetic data without too much difficulty." It's just another version of a researching accidentally capturing you in a camera, but much harder to link you to the captured information.

We're a small step right now from the police getting access to genetic databases like 23andMe, so if anyone in your family tree has gotten a genetic test it may be possible for them to identify you based on ancestry.

That's exactly how the so called Golden State Killer was caught.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_James_DeAngelo#Invest...

Video by Veritassium about the case: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=KT18KJouHWg

Re: We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies

#13

Post by toomuchtodo » Thu, Jun 08, 2023, 2:29 PM UTC

ehhthing wrote: post #5

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #4

The thing to keep in mind is that that data can't be just be linked automatically to people, they need, as the article says to "compare these sequences to public genetic data without too much difficulty." It's just another version of a researching accidentally capturing you in a camera, but much harder to link you to the captured information.

We're a small step right now from the police getting access to genetic databases like 23andMe, so if anyone in your family tree has gotten a genetic test it may be possible for them to identify you based on ancestry.

The GEDMatch database has frequently been used for this purpose.

https://hn.algolia.com/?q=gedmatch

Re: We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies

#14

Post by sublinear » Thu, Jun 08, 2023, 2:34 PM UTC

I am no statistician, but wouldn't mass DNA collection reduce the reliability of DNA evidence?

Re: We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies

#15

Post by SketchySeaBeast » Thu, Jun 08, 2023, 2:42 PM UTC

mensetmanusman wrote: post #6

Blood is sampled at birth in America, so we aren't too far away from being able to identify people who litter forever. Just takes one policy change... we are building the cells of a possible future prison.

Then why aren't they already doing that with CCTV and facial recognition?

Re: We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies

#16

Post by S_A_P » Thu, Jun 08, 2023, 2:46 PM UTC

pfdietz wrote: post #8

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then they'd know that that person had a relative there. We're still a lot of dots away from going "Well, we found this DNA by accident, it was clearly and obvious Bob was there."

I'm expecting the Republicans (if they haven't already) to insist that immigrants get their DNA put into databases. The argument would be that US citizens of long standing are already likely to have relatives in such databases (along with the genealogical information to exploit it) while criminal immigrants would be cloaked from such scrutiny, at least at first.

Why stop at Republicans? I would think that a bill that allows for more people data would get bipartisan support no problem.

Re: We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies

#17

Post by pfdietz » Thu, Jun 08, 2023, 2:47 PM UTC

S_A_P wrote: post #16

pfdietz wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm expecting the Republicans (if they haven't already) to insist that immigrants get their DNA put into databases. The argument would be that US citizens of long standing are already likely to have relatives in such databases (along with the genealogical information to exploit it) while criminal immigrants would be cloaked from such scrutiny, at least at first.

Why stop at Republicans? I would think that a bill that allows for more people data would get bipartisan support no problem.

Oh, quite likely (especially if it there is a plausible justification as I gave), but I think the GOP would be more likely to push it initially.

Re: We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies

#18

Post by perihelions » Thu, Jun 08, 2023, 2:51 PM UTC

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #15

mensetmanusman wrote: post #6

Blood is sampled at birth in America, so we aren't too far away from being able to identify people who litter forever. Just takes one policy change... we are building the cells of a possible future prison.

Then why aren't they already doing that with CCTV and facial recognition?

We are?

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/05/07/artificial-intel...

- "National Highways has revealed that it is set to launch a trial in the coming weeks which will see the high-tech cameras installed in road lay-bys which will scan the area for any instances of littering."

- "Unlike traditional CCTV cameras where enforcement officers would have to trawl through hours of footage to find offenders, the new AI cameras will be able to pick out offences and automatically send them to an enforcement control room."

Re: We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies

#19

Post by jonhohle » Thu, Jun 08, 2023, 2:51 PM UTC

pfdietz wrote: post #8

SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then they'd know that that person had a relative there. We're still a lot of dots away from going "Well, we found this DNA by accident, it was clearly and obvious Bob was there."

I'm expecting the Republicans (if they haven't already) to insist that immigrants get their DNA put into databases. The argument would be that US citizens of long standing are already likely to have relatives in such databases (along with the genealogical information to exploit it) while criminal immigrants would be cloaked from such scrutiny, at least at first.

s/Republicans/politicians/; s/immigrants/everyone/

Based on the last 2 years of "show your papers" vaccine cards, I'm not sure why you'd pin this on Republicans.

Re: We can ID people from DNA that shows up in environmental studies

#20

Post by jonhohle » Thu, Jun 08, 2023, 2:55 PM UTC

mensetmanusman wrote: post #6

Blood is sampled at birth in America, so we aren't too far away from being able to identify people who litter forever. Just takes one policy change... we are building the cells of a possible future prison.

There are already companies partnering with OBGYNs to have cord blood banked at birth (for later stem cell treatments). I'm sure millions of 10 and unders already have their biological matter held by private companies.