I don't support this, but I'm surprised they only do this until now.
23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
311–320 of 402 posts
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#312Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that the truck driver has zero fault for the gravel on the road and the spacing between the tires and the mud guard of the truck his employer maintains. Or did you mean you’d seek out the ceo of the truck company and give them a black eye?
If it's gravel they are transporting it's obviously their fault, it's the responsibility of the driver to secure the load (with some blame falling on truck companies for providing insufficient equipment). If it's random gravel from the road it's more understandable. But even then the driver is very much responsible for the mud guards on the truck they are operating, just as the police would write a ticket to the driv…
But are they “a punch in the face”-responsible?
I lived in Boston for a while. Cracked windshields were extremely common. No one was ever upset at another person.
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#313Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would you be upset if your name+phone combo was leaked? Mine is all over internet so wonder why you feel it would be bad.
I simply don't want to deal with spam or scams. If I'm exposing my contact details it would be a separate set that is dedicated to dealing with communication coming from the public.
Why? You can change your phone number and your name. Good luck with doing so with your DNA.
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#314Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#315Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is it that in the US individuals have to band together and privately launch a class action to stop these types of parasitic behaviours. The government is supposed to represent the interests of citizens.
1) Common law versus civil law. We rely a lot more on private lawsuits than on regulator action. This is probably a mistake, given that it sure looks like it adds costs to common law countries with little to no benefit (and, arguably, harm) but it’s what we have. 2) The consumer protection laws we do have, and the bodies to enforce them, are relatively weak and enforcement is spotty at best. The most recent serious a…
> consumer protection laws we do have, and the bodies to enforce them, are relatively weak
IANL - however, in the US and in US States, many serious cases have been decided in favor of the consumer, over decades. It is the most recent waves of privacy versus ad revenue that are indeed, very weak. It is awkward to defend these regulators since their failures are sometimes glaring, however it is my impression that serious settlements against industry can have silence or "gag orders" attached, and they often do. The industry lawyers can argue that the news of the settlement alone constitutes additional commercial damage to the company, and of course they are right in a narrow sense.
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#316Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#317Earlier quoted context omitted.
You forgot an important one: Your ancestors, descendants, siblings, and cousins share much of the same DNA but did not consent to its release. All of the above risks apply to them as well. I'd be most concerned about insurance companies using genetic family history to deny coverage.
I'm not too worried about it because it's never a 100% overlap. Even my brother and I share only ~50% DNA. It gets way sparser for more distant relatives. About insurance companies, they're legally forbidden to use such data.
>legally forbidden to use such data.
Great training set to check the results of other factors, then use those to infer.
Moreover "legally forbidden" means jack faeces unless you can point to people who had convictions recorded and went to jail. Otherwise we're merely discussing business conditions & expenses.
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#318Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that the truck driver has zero fault for the gravel on the road and the spacing between the tires and the mud guard of the truck his employer maintains. Or did you mean you’d seek out the ceo of the truck company and give them a black eye?
This is usually related to drivers who do not use the cover of their truck they are legally supposed to. So rocks fly out the top.
Or smaller contractor type trucks with tools in them.
Ever have to dodge an axe at 35MPH? Not fun.
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#319Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they hold your DNA hostage. Don't you want this company to exist on so nobody gets hurt. Oh, they peaked and leaked that's why the users get TOSsed. Carry on, Sir, baldly into a classy action lawsuit against a bankrupt company were some zeroday employee will get the biggest payout by insurance ever.
you can actually ask them to destroy your samples and any associated data.
And to whomever they've already likely sold it to, or in the case of gov'ts and police, given it to?
Re: 23andMe changed its terms of service to prevent hacked customers from suing
#320There’s a word for changing the terms after a deal is signed to benefit one party over the other: fraud.
"I am altering the deal. Pray I do not alter it any further."