ADVERTISEMENT

Ancestry DNA?

I did...I’m 91% British. That is a lot of British if you ask me.

Our roots go back to the blue ridge region.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Imtotallynottribe
No. Because it's stupid.
hEA410EB6
 
No. Because it's stupid.

Maybe from a personal standpoint. But the police were able to catch the Golden State Killer using sites like this....that is not studied at all.
 
Ancestry.com is interesting. They can really break down where you're ancestors are from geographically with great detail in some areas (ie sub-regions within spain, italy, or narrowed to one or two nations on the west african coast) but in others they show you next to zero detail (ie india). If you've got indian blood, they just circle the entire region consisting of india, pakistan, bangladesh, and sri lanka and that's it. No sub-region, presumably because they lack the data. I can visually tell the difference between someone from north, central or south india with about 40% accuracy, a DNA test should really be able to break it down but they don't.
 
Maybe from a personal standpoint. But the police were able to catch the Golden State Killer using sites like this....that is not studied at all.
Well if catching killers is the main objective, that's a different story. But as far as finding out your DNA, I think it's silly. Knowing you have Scottish DNA instead of French DNA doesn't make you any more Scottish than you were before. Culture determines who you are. If you were raised in France or by French parents and you love brie and croissants, you're French.
 
Ancestry.com is interesting. They can really break down where you're ancestors are from geographically with great detail in some areas (ie sub-regions within spain, italy, or narrowed to one or two nations on the west african coast) but in others they show you next to zero detail (ie india). If you've got indian blood, they just circle the entire region consisting of india, pakistan, bangladesh, and sri lanka and that's it. No sub-region, presumably because they lack the data. I can visually tell the difference between someone from north, central or south india with about 40% accuracy, a DNA test should really be able to break it down but they don't.
In that case, I'm Out!
 
Yeah, so lets give them a DNA sample for free. They sell the data to the feds, let a 3rd party do the heavy lifting, bickity-bam the mans got you in the database.
Do ancestry.com or 23nMe sell DNA data to the feds and/or could the feds subpoena it en masse or for a particular individual?

Maybe better off using an offshore DNA service if that's the case (and you're secretly the Golden State Killer).
 
If you've got indian blood, they just circle the entire region consisting of india, pakistan, bangladesh, and sri lanka and that's it. No sub-region, presumably because they lack the data. I can visually tell the difference between someone from north, central or south india with about 40% accuracy, a DNA test should really be able to break it down but they don't.

Maybe in a country where 40% of people crap outside they’re not taking lots of DNA tests.
But I would consider a caste society a great market for this service...
 
Maybe in a country where 40% of people crap outside they’re not taking lots of DNA tests.
But I would consider a caste society a great market for this service...
First, of all it's 49.8%
Second, you could have made your point politely without the condescension.

Not sure what your disdain for Indians is, but that's really on you. Have a good day, if you want to.
 
Do ancestry.com or 23nMe sell DNA data to the feds and/or could the feds subpoena it en masse or for a particular individual?

Maybe better off using an offshore DNA service if that's the case (and you're secretly the Golden State Killer).

So, I would say, not unlike verizon or FB selling your data to 3rd party advertisers, I could see a situation where the feds would pay money to get the data, then move that into a "unconfirmed" data base and they could use that to check against evidence. It would be cheaper than trying to get the samples and data themselves. Hell, ancestry.com could be a federal LLC set up by the govt for this expressed purpose for all we know. I don't think it would be admissible in court, but it might be enough to allow them to get a warrant for the DNA. Only way they have a persons DNA is if they have previously committed a crime OR submitted something to them. Consider fingerprints, many crimes have finger prints that are unmatched. But if your finger prints were submitted through some seemingly innocent method, they do have them, e.g. parents registering their kids during the 80s stranger danger craze.
 
Maybe better off using an offshore DNA service if that's the case (and you're secretly the Golden State Killer).

I don’t think we’re very many years removed from every state doing genetic testing on the 99%+ of newborn blood samples they already receive.
Issue is going to be how regulations are crafted to handle that data.
Florida’s newborn screening record retention is forever.
Not sure what law enforcement would need to do in order to access that info.
We just started genetic testing this year.
 
Nope. I don't really care about my ancestry. I really don't feel the need to identify like that. Not to mention the government is accessing the data, and there's a huge potential for abuse.
 
So, I would say, not unlike verizon or FB selling your data to 3rd party advertisers, I could see a situation where the feds would pay money to get the data, then move that into a "unconfirmed" data base and they could use that to check against evidence. It would be cheaper than trying to get the samples and data themselves. Hell, ancestry.com could be a federal LLC set up by the govt for this expressed purpose for all we know. I don't think it would be admissible in court, but it might be enough to allow them to get a warrant for the DNA. Only way they have a persons DNA is if they have previously committed a crime OR submitted something to them. Consider fingerprints, many crimes have finger prints that are unmatched. But if your finger prints were submitted through some seemingly innocent method, they do have them, e.g. parents registering their kids during the 80s stranger danger craze.

They already have. They used one of these ancestry kits to track done and arrest the Golden State Killer. They are going to try the same method to catch the Zodiac Killer as well.
 
First, of all it's 49.8%

39.835% according to the world bank, but that’s still a lot of outdoor pooping.

Second, you could have made your point politely without the condescension.

Humor, not condescension. My dad grew up in a house with a crapper out back.
They likely wouldn’t have spent money on DNA testing either even if it was available.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FayuGes
Yeah, so lets give them a DNA sample for free. They sell the data to the feds, let a 3rd party do the heavy lifting, bickity-bam the mans got you in the database.

No no no...that’s not how they used it.

They had the killers dna from when he rapped and murdered a girl.

They created an account and then submitted his DNA to the site. From what I understand the site had no clue it was the feds submitting the dna.

Once the results came back they were able to identify his 3rd cousins. From there they went backwards and learned who their common grandparents were.

Then they built out the family tree and found two people that lived in California.

I thought that was genius.
 
No no no...that’s not how they used it.

They had the killers dna from when he rapped and murdered a girl.

They created an account and then submitted his DNA to the site. From what I understand the site had no clue it was the feds submitting the dna.

Once the results came back they were able to identify his 3rd cousins. From there they went backwards and learned who their common grandparents were.

Then they built out the family tree and found two people that lived in California.

I thought that was genius.

Im not speaking to how it was used for this case at all. That was others. I am saying instead of using the front door for 1 specific, they will just be sitting at the back door taking it all.
 
Last edited:
Im not speaking to how it was used for this case at all. That was others. I am saying instead of using the front door for 1 specific, they will just be sitting at the back door taking it all.

I guess it’s possible. collecting DNA is easy to collect if you really want it. It’s everywhere and easy to obtain. But I guess the idea of taking it from place where it’s already been sumbmitted and catagorized is easier than chasing it down and doing yourself.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT