Life as an Extreme Sport

[The Daily] – New DNA collection frightening

New DNA collection frightening
2006-05-15

Computer cracker Adrian Lamo is in trouble again.

Not for cracking any new computer systems, but because he won’t give the federal government a blood sample so it can isolate his DNA and add it to the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System (CODIS).

Lamo apparently isn’t opposed to giving the government his DNA; he did provide the FBI with nail clippings and hair samples. He simply states that giving the blood is against his non-specified religious beliefs.

Those in charge, however, will only accept blood or saliva for the sample (no explanation has been given as to why Lamo has been told he can give only a blood sample).

While it is certainly easiest to isolate DNA from blood, the technology exists to utilize DNA from other parts of the body, including the hair and nail samples Lamo provided.

Now, while Lamo isn’t concerned about giving the government his DNA, I would be, and am.

I’ve known about this program for a while, but here is some background for those of you who are not familiar with it, courtesy of the FBI’s CODIS Web site:

“CODIS blends forensic science and computer technology into an effective tool for solving violent crimes.

It began as a pilot project in 1990, and enables federal, state and local crime labs to exchange and compare DNA profiles electronically, thereby linking crimes to each other and to convicted offenders.

CODIS generates investigative leads in crimes where biological evidence is recovered from the crime scene using two indexes: the forensic and offender indexes.

Matches made among profiles in the Forensic Index can link crime scenes together; possibly identifying serial offenders.

Based on a match, police in multiple jurisdictions can coordinate their respective investigations, and share the leads they developed independently.”

What I hadn’t realized is that the 2004 Justice for All Act expanded the CODIS purview to include samples from all newly convicted federal criminals, including white-collar criminals — people who commit crimes that very rarely leave any traces of DNA at the scene to test.

What, then, is the point of collecting the DNA of these white-collar criminals?

It makes me uncomfortable, because the government has ruled in the past that pieces of your body — your blood, your cancers, your spleens (Hi John Moore!), anything that can be taken from your body — are no longer yours once they are removed.

Including DNA.

It’s considered a consensual donation in medical circumstances, but in forensics, it’s either court-mandated or cast-off/thrown away and thus no longer your property (such as leaving hair at the scene of the crime).

At least that’s how I understand the forensic side of it — I’m sure someone will write in to correct me if I’m wrong.

What this means is that your DNA can be taken, stored, sequenced, analyzed and released to the public without your knowledge, without your benefit. And potentially to your detriment. There are growing fears that DNA samples showing proclivities for diseases will result, in insurance companies denying coverage.

What happens if the government sequences the DNA of one of these incarcerated criminals and finds something of value, something that requires more samples?

Criminals have very few rights over their bodies — will the government then be able to just take what it wants?

It’s concerning.

Granted, these concerns existed when CODIS was implemented to begin with, but many deemed the benefit of DNA samples and ability to match future DNA to known criminals who are at high risk of recidivism (such as sexual predators) worth the potential abuses of having that DNA.

But now we’re talking about people with low rate of recidivism who aren’t dangerous in the sense set up for CODIS, who’re having their DNA added to this system, for who only knows what reasons.

The ethics of this, and the potential for abuse of the policy, is worth thinking — even perhaps worrying about.

Parallel Position

I’ve just had what I’m sure is the first of many of this particular type of experience: not completely understanding an academic subject, but curious enough to engage, and put myself out enough to ask questions (clearly labelling myself as a novice looking to learn), and basically got shut down with a “no” and nothing else.

The most frustrating thing is that, from reading further comments, I do actually understand precisely what they’re saying, and what I was saying is not unrelated or wrong, it’s just not said right, if that makes sense. I don’t hold the language-fluency necessary to communicate my particular thoughts on the matter. I realize this is my CHID education biting me, and I realize this is going to come up again and again.

I just wonder, 3000 miles away from CHID, will I have the strength of will to continue putting myself out there and risk being wrong (and brusquely told so) in order to learn?

For what it is worth, I do realize that it’s normal to question your intelligence and ability to head off to grad school and do it, and that imposter syndrome is especially strong in women. I’m just dismayed to be feeling it already.

I have a feeling I’m going to be very quiet in Albany.

Alex Halavais » How to cheat good

Alex Halavais » How to cheat good.

Seriously funny advice for how to cheat, and at least reduce your chances of being caught. Thankfully, the one time I caught someone, it was dealt with quickly. Having sat in the ombudsman office when I was bored (she also worked for CHID), I got to see the hassle and hell – for profs – of cheaters.

The interesting thing is, it almost always comes up when I hang out with my academic/teaching friends, and they almost all opt to not deal with it; they just give the person a bad grade and move on. It’s not so much a let someone else deal with it, as it is that the university makes it so damned difficult to deal with, period. Which, really, is a shame – it ends up devaluing everyone’s work (which I think is more important than the fact that it’s insulting to the prof).

An End – 390, Presentations, Jessica

This is the closing section of my 390 presentation paper, finally handed in Friday afternoon. I felt like sharing, largely because there are a few interesting insights in the paper. Interesting to me, anyhow. Just as a warning: this contains thoughtson and my remembrances of Jessica’s death.

There’s always a conclusion to these reflections, although my reflection on the class as a whole has already wrapped up. But this paper became more than just those two hours. It has become two years of avoidance, and for a reason.

I got home the night of August 3rd to Jessica still missing. I had a friend who lived in the same building she did, and I convinced him to let me into the building, to knock at her door. I knocked for a while. We discussed breaking in — we knew how; he’d been locked out of his apartment often enough that we’d perfected the technique. We ended up deciding not to, that it wasn’t our place to make that decision, and besides, she was just off studying somewhere, and forgetting to check in with us.

Her body was found a day later, in the bathtub. August was hot that year, and the body was badly decomposed. When the medical examiner finally released the cause of death he was also able to give us a time of death — August 1st. I didn’t know any of that at the time, though. All I knew was several people contacting me at once, and my world crashing down around me, and reacting the only way I knew how: I shut down. Jessica, my grounding point, my sanity, my support and my rock, was gone, and suddenly I had to be to everyone what she had been to me.

Beloved was the last book we were to read for 390, and I couldn’t. There was no way. I tried, I read it, I went to class, and I had to walk out. I couldn’t handle talking about death and ghosts and memory, rememory. And within that grief and shutting down and doing my best to maintain control and composure, my papers for 390 ended up wrapped up in the emotional mess of the time.

When I convinced myself I would finish it later, and focus for the time on Jessica’s possessions and funeral, I was able to cage the grief and lock it away. But several weeks later, trying my first of many attempts to write about this presentation, the grief roared up and ate me, and I staggered away from the project. I couldn’t do it, I couldn’t process the grief.

Several more times, I tried to tackle this paper, and every time it was the same. I found some way to wrap myself around the paper, some novel hook and line into it. I would talk about it as a reflection of my confidence as a PF, and the differences between PFing and presenting for a single day, and why I felt the two experiences to be so differentFor the record, I think it’s a matter of support. At least for me, I received an amazing amount of support the first time I PFed. I was told what to expect, common problems that come up, given advice on how to handle an unruly class, and so on and forth. None of this was made available to be as a presenter — I really felt like I was walking into the situation blind and unknowing. More prep and support would have really benefited me; as is, I left the experience convinced I could never PF or teach, because I so badly sucked at the entire thing.. I would look at it in a collage format, piecing together one class woven with the experience of the presentation. I would find some manner to engage the text that would remove the grief. I would, except that I never did, I never managed.

I discovered some time last summer that you have to deal with grief in the order you lock it into your heart. The older griefs have to be dealt with before you can deal with the younger, newer ones, and I had several things that had happened before Jessica’s death that I had to process before I could handle this. I also discovered that it seems like you have to be experiencing a new grief in order to pass through the old. Perhaps new grief gives the old perspective?

Any which way, as I experience the grief of moving and leaving, I find myself finally experiencing the pain of Jessica’s death. And as I explore and experience that grief and pain, I find myself finally able to write the paper that should have been finished several years ago.

Since first presenting in 390, I’ve had the chance to PF many times, and I’ve seen my mistakes repeated in other people. Too eager to please, too worried about what the instructor is thinking, trying too hard to involve everyone, never letting silence sit in the room as an invitation. But I stand by the belief that the presentation my partner and I chose to give was the right presentation for that time in the class. And another pattern I’ve noticed is that the 2nd to last group to present? That’s always the group that takes the chance, sticks their neck out on the line, and tries something a little different.

HIV’s Ancestry Traced to Wild Chimps

HIV’s Ancestry Traced to Wild Chimps

Twenty-five years after the first AIDS cases emerged, scientists have confirmed that the HIV virus plaguing humans really did originate in wild chimpanzees, in a corner of Cameroon.

At this point, I’m sure you’ve seen this news, but I think it’s important enough to document here. It’s more than historic interest that makes knowing where the virus comes from – once you understand where it comes from, you’re closer to being able to find, if not a cure, at least a vaccine.

As noted in the article, non-human primates have their own version of HIV, called SIV. In fact, a *IV exists in almost every species – humans are actually an oddity that our *IV doesn’t live in relative, non-fatal harmony with us.

Anyhow, knowing where the disease originates means being able to track the variances between the original version of the disease and the new, infectious one. Being able to track those changes means it will be much more likely to come up with a way to at least block the infection from happening. It’s sort of like reverse engineering the mutation in order to prevent it from happening again, if that makes any sense.

Given how many people are infected with HIV, and that some 25% in the United States who are infected don’t know they’re infected, anything that brings us closer to a vaccine or cure is a good thing needing attention.