@aihorde@lemmy.dbzer0.com draw for me a spider’s web with a red light that attracts male fireflies to come have a good time at the web bordello

I misinterpreted your first sentence… until I read the rest of your comment.

I thought you were saying null results shouldn’t be published. Hackles go up. Keep reading angrily. Ohhhh… ALL results should be publicly available! We’ll that’s very different!

I do have a nitpick, though: if the internet has taught us nothing else, it is that all kinds of scammers, influencers, conspiracy theorists, deniers, and exploiters will ALL post lies and disinformation in any unvetted space they can find. Somebody has got to do some curation and somebody has to pay them enough to ensure that work gets done.

Could be worse. Could be an Elsevier site (Lancet, Cell, ScienceDirect, etc.).

Please read wonky news, vote, and tell your friends and neighbors about the stuff you learn about candidates. We get crappy government by voting for it. We could fix the government if we elected people who would write legislation to stop corruption, was there to fix roads and balance budgets rather than scream about triggering issues, and wanted to make a better rather than to simply ‘win’ no matter the price.

H-h-how? HOW? do they ‘anonymize’ DNA?!?! Remember how in 2007 ‘anonymized’ netflix data was linked back to actual members? That was just checking what people watched on Netflix compared to what they rated on IMDB.

With DNA, you should be able to figure out who someone is by the fact you an exact DNA record! I mean, it’ll share similarities with your parents, and children, and to a lesser degree, more removed relatives. How hard can it be to figure out that this woman is related to that guy with an arrest record. Or more specifically: this is the exact person because we see other records from any doctor or whatever with the same DNA.