We can have our GST cake. And eat it too! (part 1 of 2)
As the Australian government foreshadows imminent tax changes, some politicians, commentators and think-tanks are again proposing increasing and broadening the GST. However, the practicalities of compensating those who can’t afford the price increases might rule out even minor change.
The State Council, China’s Cabinet, has sent an investigative team with other government agencies to look into the recent resignation of over 90 nuclear security scientists at an institute of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the academy said on Tuesday.
The mystery surrounding the resignation of half of the employees in that research institute became one of the most talked-about topics in China.
The team consists of officials from the State Council’s general office, the Ministry of Science and Technology, the CAS and other departments. It will head to Hefei, Anhui province, to thoroughly investigate the situation, the academy said.
The recent resignation of over 90 nuclear security scientists at the academy’s Institute of Nuclear Energy Safety Technology has ignited public speculation on institutional bureaucracy, employee poaching and inadequate financial support for young scientific talent.
Plus this zinger at the end: “The timing of their resignation also made the Chinese netizens wonder if the scientists wanted to break their ties with the Chinese Communist Party before its imminent demise.”
Source: Consumer Reports
In exchange for your mailed sample of saliva, direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing companies promise insights about your ancestry, your family connections, and even your health. These widely used tests—from companies such as 23andMe and Ancestry—are advertised as a way to learn more about your family history, better understand your health, and more. They’re often touted as thoughtful gifts, especially around the holidays.
But many people might not have a clear understanding of what happens to their personal genetic data after they mail a tube of spit to a private company for analysis. In a new white paper (PDF) published today, Consumer Reports’ privacy experts argue that part of the reason for this uncertainty is a gap in the regulatory framework surrounding consumers’ genetic data privacy.
Right now, companies write their own privacy policies that consumers agree to when they buy a test. But few laws regulate what companies must do to keep your data private and secure.“Ideally we’d like to see federal and state laws enacted that will empower consumers to control who has access to their genetic information,” says Justin Brookman, Consumer Reports’ director of privacy and technology policy.
In one 2018 study of DTC genetic testing companies’ privacy policies, Vanderbilt University researchers found that 71 percent of companies used consumer information internally for purposes other than providing the results to consumers. Sixty-two percent said they use data for internal research and development, while 78 percent said they provided genetic information to third parties in de-identified or aggregate forms without additional consumer consent.
Why Existing Rules Are Not Enough
Unlike your credit card number or your bank account password, if your genetic information is stolen or simply given away without your consent by a company that possesses it, it can’t be changed. And recent studies of sites (PDF) such as GEDmatch (where users can publicly post their genetic data) have found that it’s possible for people with nefarious intentions to reidentify individuals from supposedly de-identified genetic data.
