I appreciate the message that the CCC was trying to convey, but this seems like the case of presenting a problem but no solution. FIngerprints have been used for identification for years, so what would they suggest we do instead?
As frightening as this is, it is completely legal. That this can occur legally may be worth questioning the broadness of the law that allows for it. It seems like an invasion, but as the utensil was discarded, there's no foul.
Unfortunately these are entirely relevant concerns, especially those pertaining to future employers and graduate schools. A reputation can be easily tarnished by not considering the consequences of what image one presents of himself. It's unfortunate that this is the case, but in the long run there it is better not to give someone the ammunition to use against you, no matter how foolish it may seem.
I assume this monitoring applies only to blogs where a poster was revealing information relevant to trade secrets or negatively commenting on the company or work environment. If someone were to be dismissed for posting on a completely unrelated blog this is an incredible violation of free speech, not to mention nonsensical.
I have to ask, if the researcher anticipates the mouse will "behave like any other mouse," then what is the point of doing the experiment? The only benefit would be if the mouse DID take on human characteristics, which has already been deemed unethical, so if it's going to develop and perform normally, then the natural brain cells are more than sufficient.
Anything that would allow an entire planet of people to be catalogued is intrinsically morally dangerous. The proposal would start off saying that the DNA would only be used for limited purposes, but eventually it would get into the hands of those with the power to use it against the population.
While I may be able to consider the appropriateness of keeping a DNA sample of those who have been convicted of a crime, doing the same for someone who has merely been arrested is reprehensible. We say innocent until proven guilty, and with this measure the government would be, in essence, criminalizing citizens who have not had their day in court.
I have a strong inherent aversion to anything of this sort... it smacks of trying to develop some Aryan race. This type of selective mindset would eventually result in there being specifically desirable traits versus undesirable, and the treatment of those who fall into the later category will become a social problem.
If we ever get to the point where this is an issue, I'm confident the process would have already been thought out far in advance. Simply put, we are nowhere near there since the government does not even acknowledge extra-terrestrial life, but if we get to a place where humans are actively interacting with other species, there would be room to consider the marriage question.
Well I know that people can "purchase" stars for themselves or loved ones and have them named and registered. It's one of those cutesy gifts that may have no real value, but someone is making money off of it, the same way you can "adopt" an animal at a wildlife sanctuary or the zoo. As far as countries purchasing new discoveries, I can't see what the monetary gain would be unless there was a way to actually use the resources from what was bought. That would require actually being able to reach the planet or star and harvest something worthwhile.
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Invention