My genetic and biometric information is already in some government's databases, sometimes with more actionable information than "elevated risk of restless legs syndrome". Associating a list of 500K SNPs with my name would bother me but not that much really. It would take a lot of work to make use of it anyway and i cant think of a reason this would harm me gravely(+). Anonymized information of my DNA would bother me even less, as i m not more exceptional genetically than most people. Tbh, this is not my information, i share DNA with most of the species on earth and i didn't really create that information (unlike, say my google searches), nor did my parents. Thats why i oppose to genetic patents too, and think that DNA should be public domain.

(+): Well if someone wants to engineer a deadly virus that targets specifically me, then what can i say , that's at least a memorable way to die. But they can do that from a piece of my hair too.

Honest question - why does it matter? Can they get access to my bank account with that info? My email? Can they impersonate me? How is it different than someone taking my picture?

Don’t I leave a trail of DNA everywhere I go anyway, from shedding dead skin cells?

Yes, an adversary could target you and illegally collect your DNA. But does that mean you should make it easy for them and publicize the data?

There are very serious reasons to keep your genetic information private [0]. Unlike a photo, genetic data reveals sensitive medical information and more...

[0] https://youtube.com/watch?v=HKQDSgBHPfY

Not GP, but personally I do not mind. I have voluntarily shared my DNA information with a number of people.

Health insurance is not important here (UK), and life insurance is much less of an important concern to me as I will not have children. But I can see why if that is not the case, you would be more concerned.

I do have some concerns about it being used by the police, though public availability is unlikely to make a difference there. I've never committed any crimes, but the police are known for using scientifically and statistically invalid methods to prosecute.

And if an employer decides to use your genetic information to discriminate against you, how would you know?

Also, in 10-20 years, what if new threats arise?

I am sorry, but I do not understand this.

If it's valid trait that employer (or insurance) finds actually having negative impact - is it really a discrimination (other than you can't really say whether it's expressed).

In the US, it is illegal for an employer or health insurance company to discriminate based on genetics [0]. But if you fail to receive a promotion because your employer found out about your genetic disease, how would you know?

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_Information_Nondiscrim...

> how would you know

Same way you get to know your KPI's and other assessments?

I guess that act is good after all. No one can tell you've got an actual disease from these tests, even if on big scale the correlation most obviously is there.