jyonkov
Neven Boyanov
Bertrand
Daniel Radev
Stefan Stefanov
Apostol Apostolov
ihayes2000
Jean
Here’s a company (Halcyon Molecular) that can truly change everything covered on TechCrunch. Imagine what the low cost of full sequencing (and a lot more data going to be available) can do to the Medicine, the ultimate personalization, match making, and so on. I’m sure Sergey Brin would rush to acquire/merge Halcyon Molecular with 23andMe. I always thought that Sergey’s interest in DNA is from the aspect of the ultimate ad platform – DNAds or GeneAds or whatever. Your DNA linked to your Google Account gets you precisely targeted ads that you’ll love with huge conversion rates for advertisers and big bucks for Google.
-
Authors
Recent comments
Eisneim on Online VFX jyonkov on Google Code Jam jyonkov on Apple vs Adobe Daniel Radev on Apple vs Adobe jyonkov on Apple vs Adobe
Apostol Apostolov, 
Daniel Radev 7:22 am on September 25, 2009 Permalink |
It’s a scary thought to have my DNA linked to Google account. Precisely targeted ads looks like blackmailing to me…
btw: there is a movie – “Idiocracy”. Take a look when you have some time…
Nikolay 8:49 am on September 28, 2009 Permalink |
I don’t mind Google having my DNA – Google or any other non-evil multi-billion corporation (isn’t multi-billion equivalent to evil though?) to aggregate such data, which used by researchers can benefit me and all of us. Privacy is overrated. If we all have life recorders (like Microsoft’s SenseCam, but recording a lot more than just that), correlating our daily activities, events with our DNAs can give answers to many medical, psychological, criminal, and so on questions that would stay unanswered until something like this happens. I’m not afraid of a Big Brother; I’m afraid of science not advancing fast enough before we or our children become too old or too sick… Think from this perspective and privacy will really sound ridiculously. Life is way too short to be wasted with non-issues like these! My co-worker Pete said once: “I really want to live long enough to see Playstation 10″… or something in that sense.
Me too and that’s why I’m one of those fanatics who strongly believe that science should always be put first as it has the key to solve all miseries of today. Putting human rights first will take us only a block away! Analyzing DNA and having tons of data to correlate it with would take us far… just like stem cell research. We just need to put science first like it used to be in the past. I’m fed up with that “sharehoder value” crap I hear left & right! So many great ideas failed to materialize just because they weren’t easy to monetize and that’s what’s slowing down the progress.
Apostol Apostolov 9:59 am on September 28, 2009 Permalink |
While I believe DNA sequencing can benefit users a great deal especially in fields of medicine and self-improvement, exposing DNA sequencing data to third parties either directly or indirectly is bound to happen, and is a collosal privacy issue that the general population already is negatively already heavily dispositioned towards. Companies with access to DNA sequencing could refuse job positions, health insurance or other bonuses and options to personel that is likely to develop certain physical weaknesses, illnesses or short life span. In a world where human genome can provide quantative degree of success would likely deny options to people with less chance of success or requiring longer preparation or training. Even without genome modification available to the masses, our soceity would develop towards a future similar to the vision of the cult movie Gattaka. There is a lot of opposition to such business models on a social and on a government level.
I think any company interested in using DNA sequencing data on a mass scale should allow users to generate data out of their DNA offline, for free (despite associated costs, such program should be heavily funded), and then pick what information from their sequencing results is being shared online with data companies such as Google. For example, a user could pay for the sequencing, but then cashback up to free service by providing bits of data to data companies, with bits of data being freely chosen by the user so that if he decides, he won’t share those he believes would be used negatively against him. Although one can imagine such a program being covered in enough legalese to confuse users and that would open a totally different can of worms.
Nikolay 11:07 am on September 28, 2009 Permalink |
First, nobody is perfect and “perfect” costs tons (the simple demand-supply rule), so, if companies use DNA to screen candidates out, it would be in 95-99% of the cases for the right reasons. At the end, more well-suited workers means higher efficiency leading to lower cost and faster progress. We all know what means to deal with a person who’s not right for their job, don’t we?
Of course, I’ve watched Gattaca and others on the subject; read sci-fi in the past… but that’s just that – fiction! I applied for a contracting job a few months ago and they made me undergo drug test via urine sample, which is a standard policy with many employers. Many companies do full background check in the US – your credit history, your driving record, your criminal record, etc, so, even if they add a DNA screening in the future – do you think it will make a big difference given the current level of screening? And I’m talking about a regular develop jobs here! I am also talking about the country that claims to have the most advanced democracy and human rights!
Anyway, human society is a very complex system, but it finds balance pretty quickly – there are many examples in history. That’s why I think we should focus on solving real problems, problems that kill and truly make millions suffer. The rest will follow naturally as advances in science and humanity go in parallel. If it happens that a part of the society starts to abuse technology to discriminate and enslave the rest, then, again, look back into history.
My point is that the human body is probably the most complex system in this universe (wrongly assuming that there are no aliens). So, in order for us to better know ourselves, we can only do so by collecting and crunching tons and tons of data and that’s why I believe DNA, life recorders, and other such methods would provide the data required. Also, having such data available to personal intelligent agents would completely revamp our lives.
An example is the wide use of LBS (Location-Based Services) nowadays. It was just 3 years ago when people (including me) were predicting the failure of those due to people caring too much about their privacy. Well, intelligence prevailed and people chose to trade privacy for better lives. The same I hear is happening in Japan with their payment cards – convenience prevailed over concerns. And that’s what usually happens – people exaggerate and overthink something, then they try it out and see nothing bad is happening and continue to use it, then start using it more and more, and at the end they can’t live without it.
Apostol Apostolov 11:51 am on September 28, 2009 Permalink |
Nickolay, the society as it is does not favor techno-fascism you propose. Even small changes to a general population thinking take a whole lot of time – racism and gay rights being two simple issues that are yet to be resolved even in most civilized countries. Your example with location-based services is not the same, as it illustrates acceptance of privacy issue opt-in services by a small group of technology-fluent users. Most of those services do not get deeply integrated and are not inherent to every human being’s life and their segregation into multiple, non-compatible services makes their impact very small, compared to what a DNA-sequencing nationwide or worldside database could do to every facet of a human’s life. Also, the problem with the undefined right of self-realization. The problem is very well studied in Gattaca. While fiction is fiction, I separate the fictional story of a man overcoming his shortcomings from the realistic look on an engineered society. In a society that favors gene-perfection and filters based on innate qualities, giving life to imperfect gene-carrying individuals is a crime against that individual because of his inability to exist as a productive unit in that society. Our society does not have gene-modification technologies right now. Filtering people by gene-qualities without tools to modify human genome to suit perfection, is like punishing people for being born, with no exception. I can guarantee you that your point will not hold in congress nor court. Too many implications that do not offer a solution to them, nobody would dare open such Pandora’s Box.
Nikolay 7:12 pm on September 28, 2009 Permalink |
I really don’t see where you get the fascism ideas from. I never mentioned gene modification and engineering babies and that’s the big problem – people always seem to scale down any idea to their biggest nightmare.
I am not supporting any gene alterations and you probably don’t know, but I’m a person who is a huge supporter of everything natural and green, I eat organic, I don’t take medicines that do nothing and just tax liver and other organs. “Studying” and “altering” are two different things. And even without mass DNA sequencing and aggregating life data, rich would still be altering their genes and engineer their heirs. You can’t stop this! They already engineer babies here in the US – you pay $3K and get the gender of baby you want. Also, “perfect” is all relative. The Aztec considered cross-eyed women the most beautiful. Nowadays, the crazier you are, the cooler people think you’re, and so on. So, again, things change and to me, there isn’t such thing as an imperfect person – we are as perfect as we could be given evolution and natural selection. Genes give us different starts in life, but what we become is possibly mostly driven by other things. The classic example are the twins. Another example is having good genetic material, but your mom smoked heavily during pregnancy or used recreational drugs or spent too much time nearby the microwave oven.
Neven Boyanov 9:42 am on September 29, 2009 Permalink |
Very interesting discussions here.
It is interesting topic anyways. I was wondering why that giant turtle Adwaita lived 250 years.
But in the world of that strange mixture of democracy and capitalism (I like the remark about Idiocracy), I always have doubts about what’s the real purpose behind the beautiful color brochures that suggest you do this or that.
Why we are so afraid of age and death? In fact, it is a philosophical question.
If we assume for a moment that death is a real end and there’s no afterlife, then there’s nothing to worry about. You just die and all your suffering and pain ends with the end of your life. On the other hand, some people believe that death is not an end but just another beginning. We don’t know that for certain since no one have ever returned from there. But in all cases, that’s even better. There’s a third group of course who believe that life does not exist at all, but it’s only a product of the imagination of a giant (supreme) being, or just a “matrix” in the memory of the primeval computer that controls the universe.
So then why studding NDA to prolong your lifespan? What you gonna do after you turn 100?
You haven’t lived even one third of your life and you’re already thinking about living longer, isn’t that absurd?
Every period of humans life has its purpose. At 10 you start discovering things in the world around you; at 20 you start learning things; at 30 you develop yourself, you enjoy your family and children; at 40 you start gathering the fruits your long years labor; at 50 you enjoy the life; at 60 you enjoy your grandchildren; at 70 – I don’t know what you do, it’s too early for me to think about it. But what you gonna do after you turn 110? You certainly cannot do what you were doing when you were 22.
Everything in the existence has its purpose, including all living things and all thinking things – like humans and aliens.
Like it or not people and companies will continue DNA research, studding it, modifying it.
It is tempting to claim that DNA researches could cure a lot of diseases but may harm someone else, but for a great cause. But tell me if you can find the ultimate medicine for the worst disease in the world and removed it from the face of the earth forever, but you have to kill one person, will you do that?
Seriously, I’ll be most afraid of the Chinese, they will probably produce some kind of a 99 cents personal DNA analyzer or $9.99 personal DNA modifier, that you can buy from eBay – free shipping. But that will be long after all the military research labs have implemented some “improvements” to their soldiers – for army there’s no limits and there’s no moral, there’s only short term winning strategies and tactics that do not coupe with life and its preservation. This is not science fiction.
I’m sure that one could find 100% practical reasons why such studies should be supported. Unfortunately, we nave no choice but observe, we cannot influence this, but no one can stop us for thinking about it and discuss it.
If it was only for the purpose of pure science and to add more to the knowledge of human race, yes – I will support, I could even participate a research – as a white mouse.
BTW, I forgot to mention – these are just random thoughts on Tuesday morning.
Apostol Apostolov 9:47 am on September 29, 2009 Permalink |
Neven, governments are most afraid of society of no fear. People who fear are predictable and easy to control and manipulate, thus can be contained within certain boundaries of behavior. People who fear nothing – including age or death – are hard to control and manipulate. Such development on a global scale would meet extreme government resistance, thus manipulated social resistance as well. We do not know what a society of no fear would breed, as no society has ever maintained such. In fact, societies are based on fear – from the primitive fear for survival, to the social fear of ostracizing.
Apostol Apostolov 8:40 pm on September 28, 2009 Permalink |
It seems I cannot further reply within the old thread so I have to start a new one. Nickolay, Fascism AFAIK is about eliminating people based on inherent traits deemed unworthy, not modifying them. I think gene modification would go in lines of forced post-humanism. But fascism is about eliminating people – and in a future where gene analysis eliminates people from social and professional career is pretty much fascism in action. If that statement offends you, I apologize and won’t dig into it further.
Studying DNA and altering DNA are two completely different things, although the former is ultimately seeking to achieve the latter. The problem with studying DNA and having the data vailable for verification and analysis by third parties without the ability to modify it actually means that you brand certain people unworthy or uncapable of certain acts, certain professions and compensating innate incapabilities by definition of their DNA analysis, no matter how precise the data it. Actually being able to modify the DNA structure would compensate for that – by sacrificing a mid-generation of naturally born humans, we will strive towards a generation of perfect human beings. Perfect for the tasks the parents have set to prepare their child for – family of sportsmen would want a physically talented kid, family of lawyers want an intelligent son, etc. Specialization in life based on pre-birth modification will even further limit individuals in excelling in totally different fields of professional life, i.e. super intelligent geek who is denied physically capable genes and would live a life in envy towards physically capable jocks – only because his life has been predetermined by choice of DNA sequencing. Media will continue to influence consumerism values and set expectations even further, into body modification perhaps, now that the general population could meet criteria that prior that were strictly in the domain of selected physically gifted individuals. As for post-birth development, we both agree that people get their potential from the genes, but how they develop that potential is in the hands of their parents, their own and their environment. That is beyond control of simple genetic analysis, yet in a world that favors structural predetermination, people would be preferred for their genetic affinity even if they show phychological or emotional incompetence for the job.
Nikolay 9:10 pm on September 28, 2009 Permalink |
I understand Fascism and just wondered when did I mention elimination – that’s all and I don’t get offended so easily!
Anyway, at the end, Fascism is a lo-tech DNA modification – by eliminating unworthy people, you control the “quality” of the collective DNA of the future – materializing the Aryan race in the course of several generations – just like they probably did in Troy. But, tell me, aren’t they doing this nowadays anyway? In the USA, every pregnant woman undergoes a Down Syndrome test. If the test is positive, the parents have the choice of an abortion. Isn’t this a low-grade Fascism of the modern time?
Apostol Apostolov 6:59 am on September 29, 2009 Permalink |
Actually, if we have to be precise, Fascism was not about DNA modification at all – it was about DNA elimination. Germany presumed Aryan race was superior, no need of modification as it was already superior as it is, and went jihad on everyone else. You are right about DNA filtering for Down Syndrome, but on a larger scale when a baby can be checked for almost every trait and parents decide abortion on base of trait is not good enough, keep in mind we have a serious problem. What if the world goes totally pro-intelligence and parents start aborting children showing physical traits but low intelligence traits?
Nikolay 7:25 am on September 29, 2009 Permalink |
You are right that Fascism was DNA (owner) elimination – my mistake. I’m not perfect, I’m not Aryan.
Regarding existing practices in the US: they screen for sickle cells and some other diseases using blood samples. If the mother would be 35+ during delivery, they also routinely perform amniocentesis, which is getting genetic samples from the baby and then they run various tests. Then parents should make a decision upon any positive tests.
But I’m sure that even now the rich can send samples to private companies such as Knome and perform full sequencing… BTW, Knome used to charge $300K an year ago and now I see they have lowered to “only” $100K.
Nikolay 7:28 am on September 29, 2009 Permalink |
OMG, I just saw that Knome has their site in… Russian (their only translation)! I guess they get a lot of business from Russian oligarchs!