The mythology of genetic coercion is thoughts that genetic data, especially large-scale genetic databases, have the ability to pinpoint certain risk of disease. They provide agency to act to prevent such disease, and it can be used to create accurate personalized treatment for disease, and it should also be entrusted with the authority to dictate the modification of the genome for future generations.
Archive (Page 3 of 5)
We’re trying to say it’s on you, it’s your responsibility, figure this out, download this, understand end-to-end encryption, when it’s a shared problem and it’s a communal problem.
What does it mean to be private when you’re in a place where you have no right to privacy but are ironically deprived of the thing that makes your privacy go away?
I think that privacy is something that we can think of in terms of a civil right, as individuals. […] That’s a civil rights issue. But I think there’s also a way to think about it in terms of a social issue that’s larger than simply the individual.
How do we take this right that you have to your data and put it back in your hands, and give you control over it? And how do we do this not just from a technological perspective but how do we do it from a human perspective?
As we’re giving our homes this new layer of smartness and intelligence, we’re giving away its ownership to very large organizations. And as we become a generation of renters, what I’m very interested in is how do landlords respond to that?
We have to know what we want. We have to imagine how it looks. We have to understand how it feels, how it smells, how it functions, before we can design it. Before we can code it. Before we can implement it, and before we can sell it.
You don’t need a CS degree to know how [technologies] impact your life, so how do we start examining those impacts and then leading with an understanding of what we actually want to build, how we want to build it, and letting the imaginative capabilities of all of these people drive that.