• liv@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m waiting for the part where the US insurance companies are discovered using that data en mass to increase premiums and deny coverage.

      That’s going to be my “I told you so”.

      • Sina@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        That will take a long time, right now analyzing one person’s DNA to a point where an insurance company could profit from it costs way more than the extra profits from denying some potentially short-lived clients.

        (or an AI based analyzer is already in the works)

        • ConsciousCode@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Considering prior authorization is predicated on the fact that if they reject enough requests inevitably some people won’t fight them, meaning they don’t have to pay out, I wouldn’t be surprised if they use a slightly better than chance prediction as justification for denying coverage, if they even need an actual excuse to begin with.

        • liv@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I’m old enough that a lot of things that were going to take a long time have come to pass, so I feel confident this will come.

          AI and genetics are both moving fairly fast, and insurance is about numbers and probabilities.

    • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Don’t expect much lol, when I pointed out that this was inevitable the most common response was “who cares?”

      Privacy is dead mainly because your average person doesn’t actually care about it

      • 4dpuzzle@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Privacy is dead because of the average person. They were informed several times, but they decided it wasn’t important. And they ruined it for everyone else who cared.

    • Devi@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Were they of the idea that when you tick the “my data can be used anonymously for research” box it meant that their data WOULDN’T be used anonymously for research?