Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

stackdiary.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 252 posts

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#91

Post by robomartin »

I can’t count the times I have advised friends and family against using certain products and services, only to be ignored or be accused of being paranoid. In some cases the response is “well, you can already find anything about anyone on the internet” or “they already have everything”, etc. It’s incredibly frustrating to watch some of these highly consequential breaches happen. I have yet to have someone come back to me to say “You know, you were right.

I am sure many/most HN readers have come across this to varying degrees.

Not sure there’s a fix. The only people who eventually get it are those who are unlucky enough to eventually suffer the consequences of their lack of interest in privacy and data safety.

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#92

Post by Ephil012 »

Obscurity4340 wrote: post #77

Is there an actually privacy-respectful genome service like this or is 23&me literally the only game in town(the world)?

Your best bet is probably to go through a doctor and get testing from a medical genome sequencing service that is covered under HIPAA. I am not 100% sure if this is bulletproof, but it is probably better than going through a DTC company. Plus, most DTC companies like 23 and me use imprecise genome sequencing and not full genome sequencing like many medical providers do.

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#93

Post by Buttons840 »

bushbaba wrote: post #35
deckeraa wrote: post #7

The more TOS I read through, the more it seems we need a "common law" solution. (I use the term "common law" loosely here) Something like a couple of pre-defined categories for software services (e.g. info provider, social network, real-world interface) with pre-set rules (e.g. the client cannot attempt to break the social network; the owner of the social network cannot re-sell data to a third party). We have somethi…

The easy answer should be TOS that are not non lawyer readable or not under N paragraphs are not binding. When you buy a house you don’t give 1 signature. You literally sign every friggen page including multiple places on the same page, TOS shouldn’t be different

Require companies to make a reasonable effort to ensure users have read the license.

Want to order some food from some new delivery website? Hold on, I just have to sit on this screen for 30 minutes pretending to read the EULA -- oh nevermind, I'll just go pick it up.

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#94

Post by eesmith »

jacquesm wrote: post #61
Libcat99 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the important takeaway is such a weapon could potentially target a DNA profile while ignoring others.

Yes, exactly. And that DNA profile could be more or less specific as well to the point where you can commit genocide. Think 'final solution', not 'James Bond'.

There will be several Nobel Prizes in creating the technology to get this bioweapon.

You need something which reproduces itself even in non-targets, which enters the cell's nucleus, which detects the correct DNA - which may be scattered across the genome! -, which has a mechanism that kills the target people, and where none of this will mutate so as to stop effectiveness, change/broaden the target population, etc.

Furthermore, just because people identify as a group does not mean they have a distinct genetic pattern. How would you target "Christians" or "Americans" or "Hispanics"?

This appears to be a harder task than curing cancer, in that many of the same techniques could be used to target cancerous cells but that does not require the ability to spread from person to person.

A bioweapon doesn't appear in a vacuum. The required technological advances will be widely known. In this fantastical cancer-free world, why wouldn't your local health care center have the ability to sequence unexpected genomes and prepare a vaccine or phage in the same day?

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#95

Post by drivebyadvice »

jacquesm wrote: post #57
consumer451 wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Before you submit your data for genetic testing please realize that you are giving away a portion of the ultimate family heirlooms, the genes that run in your family and that this decision could easily come back to bite others. I wish my mom had read this. She would have understood the implications, and not done it.

I actually wrote it for my mom... It's very annoying how these companies sucker people in to do things they might come to regret later, there is absolutely zero transparency here. Besides the potential for massive privacy violation there is also always the specter of future uses against your interests.

>there is also always the specter of future uses against your interests.

This. The danger isn't even necessarily that we gain some crazy ability to predict things about a person from their DNA, but that people believe that it can be done accurately and that police, courts, government, marketers, etc believe it as well.

Police don't need much convincing if it gets them a conviction. Courts will already admit evidence from forensic labs which have been proven to fabricate evidence. Governments will let just about anything fly if someone donates enough, and if marketers are convinced that it might work, there will be no shortage of cash for campaign funds.

Currently, to my knowledge, you can take somebody's DNA and do just about anything with it without their knowledge or consent, and there seem to be a lot of well-monied interests with a stake in keeping things that way.

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#96

Post by 1letterunixname »

RyanShook wrote: post #51

To: arbitrationoptout@23andme.com Subject: Request to Opt-Out of Updated TOS 23andMe Team, I am contacting you regarding the recent changes to the 23andMe Terms of Service, dated November 30, 2023. My name is [your name as registered with 23andMe], and the email associated with my 23andMe account is [your 23andMe account email]. I hereby formally request to opt out of the newly updated Terms of Service. I do not cons…

Thank you kindly for throwing this template together. You have the makings of an awesome associate or paralegal. ;]

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#97

Post by 1letterunixname »

mindvirus wrote: post #6

"If you have not notified us... you will be deemed to have agreed..." Is changing the terms of a service agreement with no confirmation/acceptance from the user even legal or enforceable?

IANAL, but I believe it works the same way to say physical property. If you don't "defend" it by objecting to it or putting up fences, and let people move in or say they are changing things, it's effectively qui tacet consentire videtur (silence gives consent).

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#98

Post by justinpombrio »

mindvirus wrote: post #6

"If you have not notified us... you will be deemed to have agreed..." Is changing the terms of a service agreement with no confirmation/acceptance from the user even legal or enforceable?

My understanding is that courts haven't even tested if terms of service are enforceable, never mind sudden updates to them.

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#99

Post by anonymouskimmer »

consumer451 wrote: post #59
jacquesm wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you are misreading the GP. What they mean is a bioweapon specifically tailored to match a particular DNA profile. Think Germany, 1939, or South Africa, 1985, but with this capability to see what the possibilities are and how utterly unstoppable that would be. And probably there are contemporary examples as well, but I don't feel like starting a flame-fest.

It could be specific to a family, or with this broad a DNA + meta data dataset, it could be enough data to wipe out much of an entire group. Choose the common traits in people who self-identified as a group. English, Jews, Slavs, Native South Americans, non-Han, etc. The problem with bio-weapons has always been "blow back." Narrowing the scope of the weapon would help a lot with that.

Any narrowing of scope would be temporary.

Re: 23andMe updates their TOS to force binding arbitration

#100

Post by barnabyjones »

jacquesm wrote: post #70
Rodeoclash wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I personally don't have any murderous history to hide I've been meaning to ask, could you please remove the curtains to your bedroom so I can see in? I know you're not doing anything wrong so you've got nothing to hide.

I think you missed the general tone of the GP's comment and inferred something they did not intend to say.

I think his point was that using this qualifier gives more credence to the "nothing to hide" folks. The more people get used to saying it in defense, the easier it becomes to use as an attack.
Post reply on HN