Jim Henderson wrote:
> supposed to be 100% accurate (or better than 99% accurate), 

Read "better than 99% accurate" as "less than 3 million false positives" in 
a nation-wide DNA database.

> how exactly does one challenge that if it's 
> supposed to be infallible?

To be fair, that's a pretty damn easy thing to challenge. "Here, take my DNA 
again."

Of course, every accused criminal will try this approach, at which point, 
what did you save by doing a giant collection in the first place.

> but the law sets the police up so as 
> to be required to engage in racial profiling. 

It's also a witch-trial law. If someone reports you as illegal, the police 
are required to come and make you prove you're not.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Linux: Now bringing the quality and usability of
   open source desktop apps to your personal electronics.

Post a reply to this message