Earlier quoted context omitted.
They probably know that it doesn't hold water legally. The hope is to victim blame as much as possible so that fewer people sue them in the first place. The next step will be to "remind" people about the TOS that they totally agreed to.
Exactly. Same reason construction vehicles have "Stay back 200 feet: not responsible for broken windshields" written on the back.
23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
161–170 of 402 posts
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#162As someone living in the EU, these kind of things puzzle me a lot. How can a legal system exist, where it's possible to deny a (consumer) contract party access to the legal system and law of the land? (In the EU we do have arbitrations clauses, but they are only legal between businesses and tightly regulated. Arbitration "courts" must be neutral. And you can not put them into ToS.) Also, I was under the impression th…
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#163I would have presumed that security-minded people, which includes those who work in tech, would not so easily give away their genome, and that most of 23andMe's customers are a slice of the general population. But then I read about things like WorldCoin and that people who go to startup parties jump at the chance to give away scans of their retinas and I'm befuddled. Why would anyone willingly do that?
Please let me know in technical terms, combined with rational argument, why what I did was unwise. Presume I already know all the common arguments, evaluated them using my background knowledge (which includes a PhD in biology, extensive experience in human genome analysis, and years of launching products in tech).
I've been asking people to come up with coherent arguments for genome secrecy (given the technical knowledge we have of privacy, both in tech and medicine) and nobody has managed to come up with anything that I hadn't heard before, typically variations on "well, gattaca, and maybe something else we can't predict, or insurance, or something something".
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#164As someone living in the EU, these kind of things puzzle me a lot. How can a legal system exist, where it's possible to deny a (consumer) contract party access to the legal system and law of the land? (In the EU we do have arbitrations clauses, but they are only legal between businesses and tightly regulated. Arbitration "courts" must be neutral. And you can not put them into ToS.) Also, I was under the impression th…
I doubt this will work. But there’s “no harm in trying.”
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#165To duck out of the new ToS, just write this email to legal@23andme.com-- To Whom It May Concern: My name is [name], and my 23andMe account is under the email [email]. I am writing to declare that I do not agree to the new terms of service at https://www.23andme.com/legal/terms-of-service/ .
I wonder what would happen if someone used one of the public email dumps and automated a mass opt-out of every email ever spotted in the wild.
But I don't see how drunken anarchist tactics help, and that noise seems like it would be a counterproductive diversion.
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#166Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Can you give an example? See my other comment, but in short I essentially mean the true realization of "precision medicine" and gaining a greater understanding of how different genotypes result in disease, information which can be used guide treatment and to develop better treatments. > That assumes there's someone out to get you specifically. Not entirely true- the ability to reconstruct genotypes from environment…
>> That's like saying there's no point in having 2FA or strong passwords, because the FSB, the FBI and Mossad can get in anyway. > Unlike your password, your DNA is unencrypted and gets spread everywhere. This doesn't address the point. In both cases, someone sufficiently motivated could get what they want from you. So by your argument, there's no point in maintaining privacy for either piece of information (DNA / pa…
I think DNA is probably sensitive on the level of someone knowing your name and DOB. Not convinced it's much more dangerous than that.
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#167Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same people believed crypto-currency, infinite growth, social media and many other things. At least 23andMe provided actual value, to some at least. What I find strange is that 23andMe did not automatically delete data after 30 days, or at the very least took it offline, only to be available on request. Notify people that their results are available and inform them that the data will be available for 30 days afte…
What actual value did 23andMe and similar services offer in the first place? Quenching someone's curiosity about where their ancestors are from? Do we even know how accurate it is at doing that?
Over time it became clear that 23andMe's data set had limited predictive ability for health for a number of technical reasons (previously, dahinds, one of their statistical geneticists, has defended the quality of their predictions on HN, you can search for his comments. I suspect he can no longer comment on HN because of 23&Me's security debacle).
However, around that same time, 23&Me's dataset turned out to be excellent for ancestry analysis. It's generally considered fairly accurate (not just 23&Me- the entire process of ancestry through snp genotyping workings really well).
I never did 23&Me but my dad did- and he learned he has children all around the US (half brothers and sisters of mine) from some samples he provided some 45+ years ago. Both my dad and those people gained value from making that connection. It's interesting because my dad had already done most of the paper research (including going to SLC to visit the Mormon archives) to identify our obvious ancestors, and these relatives would never have shown up.
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#169I would have presumed that security-minded people, which includes those who work in tech, would not so easily give away their genome, and that most of 23andMe's customers are a slice of the general population. But then I read about things like WorldCoin and that people who go to startup parties jump at the chance to give away scans of their retinas and I'm befuddled. Why would anyone willingly do that?
I'm familiar with security (I keep a copy of Applied Cryptography on my shelf for "fun reading") and tech, here's a copy of my whole genome: https://my.pgp-hms.org/profile/hu80855C Note it's a full human genome, far more data than a 23&Me report. You can download the data yourself and try to find risk factors (at the time, the genetic counsellors were surprised to find that I had no credible genetic risk factors). Pl…
Sure, if you don't believe in any of the potential negative scenarios, anything goes. You could also post your full name, SSN, DOB, address, etc. here if you are secure in the knowledge that no harm could ever come of it.
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#170As someone living in the EU, these kind of things puzzle me a lot. How can a legal system exist, where it's possible to deny a (consumer) contract party access to the legal system and law of the land? (In the EU we do have arbitrations clauses, but they are only legal between businesses and tightly regulated. Arbitration "courts" must be neutral. And you can not put them into ToS.) Also, I was under the impression th…
My impression is that everything in the USA has become lawyerized. Politicians are all lawyers. If you have assets of more than a mill, you have a legal team. You can't move for lawyers. I'm watching stories about a man facing 90 charges, who is still running for president (and has a good chance of winning). All of his co-accused are lawyers.
Youd think that, with so many lawyers around, it should be really quick to get justice. But it's the opposite; apparently, the more lawyers are involved, the longer justice is delayed.