this post was submitted on 17 Nov 2025
381 points (97.5% liked)

Science Memes

17369 readers
727 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] psud@aussie.zone 2 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Other dead people have no right to privacy, especially dead famous people

[–] DeathsEmbrace@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago

This means release the Epstein files.

[–] Njos2SQEZtPVRhH@piefed.social 19 points 2 days ago (3 children)

If it turns out Hitler had some bad genes his relatives' descendants will get a bad name. This is obviously a joke, but it's actually true as well. They've all distanced themselves from the name Hitler, but surely some people know about their relation to Adolf. I guess the questions is: how bad is it when you're grandfathers half-brother or whatever his DNA is public. There is a legitimate privacy concern there, that shouldn't be too easily dismissed because 'haha hitler & privacy'.

the question if you need relatives consent to make your dna public is interesting. I have my opinions, but the question of an historical dead figure has rights to privacy is another.

However, seeing if there's an "evil" gene is both cartoonishly naive and smells of eugenics. Hitler would have approved said study.

[–] philpo@feddit.org 6 points 1 day ago

His relatives actually decided to not have children collectively afaik.

They appeared to be fairly nice chaps - a friend of mine interviewed one of them 20 years ago for a uni research project.

[–] KeenFlame@feddit.nu 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I feel like you still haven't explained what the privacy concern is

[–] Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (3 children)

DNA is basically your identity. Your health, your ancestry, everything. But its also, not just you. Its your family, past and future. If we start talking the DNA of the dead, and Im pretty sure we already do as the dead have no rights, then at some point someone is going to challenge the right to privacy of the living in this area. After all, we're all going to die sooner or later, so why not get that sweet, sweet data just now?

Basic harms would be health insurance. If a provider has your DNA, it might show that your great, great granny got cancer. And they use that data to increase your rates. Or worse, deny your treatment, because your granny had the same treatment, and it didnt work.

What about work? Your ancestor has his history of health issues, and so refuses to hire you because you might get that too.

DNA from you or your relatives can also be use to track you, identify you, connect you to certain locations.

But heres the big one. Cancer. Your DNA holds the key to curing cancer. Some company has your DNA, and using your DNA creates a cure for Cancer. They then make trillions of money off of it. And you get fuck all, even though it your DNA. You dont even get to say that it should be given away. Its theirs now.

Also, once a company has your DNA. They have it forever. That you and your family, easily profiled, tracked, and whatever else until the end of time. What if, at some point, some targets you or a descendant with a DNA targeted virus? Science fiction now, but maybe not in the future.

Basically, the damage that can be done is limitless.

But heres the big one. Cancer. Your DNA holds the key to curing cancer. Some company has your DNA, and using your DNA creates a cure for Cancer. They then make trillions of money off of it. And you get fuck all, even though it your DNA. You dont even get to say that it should be given away. Its theirs now.

Basically what happened to Henrietta Lacks

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] drolex@sopuli.xyz 233 points 2 days ago (5 children)

And additional question: even if it was technically feasible, was it really ethical to surgically implant Hitler's cloned brained into the body of a silverback gorilla and make it fight against Tigerstalin?

[–] state_electrician@discuss.tchncs.de 126 points 2 days ago (5 children)

Everybody's so concerned with preserving Hitler's brain. But when you put it into the body of a great white shark, ooh, suddenly you've gone too far.

[–] drolex@sopuli.xyz 21 points 2 days ago

Ah! I knew it was not a novel approach. Thanks Pr. Farnsworth, you crazy sciency trailblazer.

[–] user224@lemmy.sdf.org 18 points 2 days ago (2 children)

great white shark

I see what you did here.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 18 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

But in the 80s, we transplanted Donald Trump's brain into a house cat addicted to cocaine.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone 140 points 2 days ago (24 children)

Is there any value to analyzing his DNA? The idea that evil is genetic is itself feeding into some Nazi ideas about eugenics that are deeply wrong.

[–] roguetrick@lemmy.world 46 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Maybe we want to clone Hitler but raise him to be antifa.

[–] ordnance_qf_17_pounder@reddthat.com 26 points 2 days ago (4 children)

Reminds me of a classic AskReddit aneurysm post.

If Hitler was Hitler today, and Hitler cloning machine. You hold world hostage with Hitler Clone Hitler Unlimited Hitler. What hold hostage with exchange for Hitler Hitler?

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Quibblekrust@thelemmy.club 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Nazis will take any data they want and turn it evil, even if it's only half true. And they'll ignore data that conflicts with their belief. It doesn't matter what science discovers.

We already have evidence that some forms of "evil" are inheritable. This isn't new. For instance example, I saw a documentary like 20 years ago that showed how one adopted baby—in a nice suburban family, with a couple other perfectly normal kids—was a criminal at a young age. Like stealing-a-school-bus-at-age-nine criminal, and that was just one of many examples. They showed two family trees: his adopted and his biological, and highlighted people who had been arrested, convicted of crimes, etc. They used a few different colors, and sometimes colored in one person's node with two or more colors. His adopted family had like one spot going back 3 generations. His biological family was a rainbow! Remember, he was adopted as a baby and raised with love, and the other kids were fine.

And science has demonstrated that offspring of stressed-out female mice are much more aggressive than their peers.

Now what do we do with this kind of data? Be proactive about helping certain kids if they have certain genes. Give them safe outlets for their impulses, or what have you. Extra monitoring. I dunno.

As for the stressed-out mothers... If you want to stop generational crime, give financial support and therapy to low income mothers. Because their stress is likely epigenetically producing criminal children.

What would a Nazi do? Nothing. Nazis don't care if people are evil. What are they going to do, eugenics themselves? They're the ones with the most colorful family trees.

Just some food for thought. I don't think we should suppress science just because Nazis exist.

[–] TheFogan@programming.dev 24 points 2 days ago

Yeah to me that's the biggest objection... he's long dead, he has no surviving family that wants good for him to my knowledge. So to me that's kind of on the same level as, digging up mummies. The evil actions he commited in life don't really come into play here, and agreed it's really stupid idea to think that his behavior is genetic.

Kind of reminds me of when most of the nazi generals swore to have no kids to not carry on their DNA, except one, who said "No I won't sign that pledge, that's eugenics which is nazi ideology".

[–] DaedalousIlios@pawb.social 17 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't think this is about "is evil genetic." The first psragraph of the article states it's about his underlying health conditions. Which I think is absolutely worth studying, if it means spotting the early warning signs and intervening before another person ends up like Hitler.

But then I remember the world we live in and realize it's probably not at all going to end up like that. So who knows? But they're definitely not going to find "the Evil Gene."

[–] infinitesunrise@slrpnk.net 16 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (4 children)

The "underlying health conditions" they mention are a possible predisposition for schizophrenia, autism, bipolar disorder, and kallman syndrome. Things that most certainly do not create hilters, and if it's being argued by anyone that they may then it is indeed apologia for fascist ideology. The thing that actually does create hitlers.

I think that his genetics might somewhat illuminate or inform historical events, but having it out there in our media environment just begs to have it abused and misconstrued by the wrong people for the wrong reasons.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (20 replies)
[–] Honytawk@feddit.nl 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Doesn't a criminal give up their right to freedom by doing crimes?

So why wouldn't a war criminal give up their right to privacy by doing war crimes?

[–] _cryptagion@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Uh, IDK about anywhere else, but in the US prisoners are supposed to retain their bodily autonomy even while imprisoned. the actual reality is that that is often ignored by the government, but that's what the law says, at least.

[–] Honytawk@feddit.nl 3 points 1 day ago

Sure they still have rights.

But not their right to freedom. That is why they are in prison. They aren't allowed to leave.

[–] I_Has_A_Hat@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Ok, but only to an extent. Prisoners 100% get fingerprinted. Not sure if they collect their DNA too, but I wouldn't be at all surprised; to the point where I already assume they do.

[–] burntbacon@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 day ago

I know for a fact that certain places now mandate collection of dna for many crimes.

[–] Piafraus@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Is it already proven that they are criminals or do you want to remove someone right in order to prove they are criminals?

[–] Stitch0815@feddit.org 2 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Rights of people are regularly taken away to prove they are criminal.

Searching peoples homes for evidence is probably the most common way.

It's also proven that Hitler was one of the worst human beeings ever to walk the earth.

[–] 0x0@infosec.pub 1 points 20 hours ago

It's also proven that Hitler was one of the worst human beeings ever to walk the earth

That's only caused we haven't searched the right home yet.

[–] Tiempo@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 2 days ago (6 children)

For fuck sake.... Genetists needs to read some social science. What is all with this making Hitler the biggest reason for the existence of Nazism and the occurrence of the Holocaust? This is why people believe that you can beat fascism with a vote, as if it is a leadership problem and not a complete social movement and social transformation problem

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] rizzothesmall@sh.itjust.works 45 points 2 days ago

Does this neolithic prehuman have a right to privacy? If they can't give consent, what does it say about this project?

[–] einlander@lemmy.world 53 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I find it curious that they talk about privacy for Hitler but don't mention Henrietta Lacks who this very thing happened to. Her cell cultures are being used to this day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks

[–] Venat0r@lemmy.world 17 points 2 days ago

that's how you know the whole argument is a dog whistle...

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Harvey656@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago (7 children)

Does Tutankhamun's DNA need consent?

Disregarding the fact that he was evil, Im not sure historical figures qualify for the same rights as we average people do. I think at most, we should respect what they respected, and Hitler did not respect privacy, so get fucked nazi, your DNA is ours.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Atlas_@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Who is harmed by this? No one living. Maybe you could argue Hitler has some right to not have his remains disturbed, but DNA testing isn't very invasive and we do it at crime scenes without consent all the time, so it's minor even if relevant.

What could we learn? Nothing of value. Even if there is some "psychopath gene" or "genocide gene" you'd need 100s of examples to show the effect and far easier to just pick such candidates from living, diagnosed people who can consent.

So then should we do it? Probs not. No real reason to, even though there's little reason not to.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] nathanjent@programming.dev 19 points 2 days ago (3 children)

The whole study is weird. Do they think there is a correlation between his DNA and the horrible acts he did? Are we going to start rounding up anyone with that genetic marker? Put them in camps?

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Nomorereddit@lemmy.today 4 points 1 day ago

"But who prays for Satan? Who, in eighteen centuries, has had the common humanity to pray for the one sinner that needed it most?" Mark Twain

[–] Doomsider@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Why are we even talking about Hitler's DNA? Out of all the news why this. We are seriously weird.

[–] BanMe@lemmy.world 9 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Researchers sequenced his DNA recently from a bloodstained couch cushion, we've been getting glimpses into it lately.

[–] faintwhenfree@lemmus.org 8 points 2 days ago (9 children)

Also he's dead, why do dead people deserve anything, any rights? What harm happens to Hitler? He's dead. Did we ask dinosaurs to look at their DNA, for all we know they were sentient? The whole argument is stupid.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago

In the case of DNA, because it's shared with relatives and descendants who might be still alive. In Hitler's case, that might not be that much of an issue, but you were talking about dead people in general.

If your parents are dead, and thus they get DNA sampled, that information gained is good enough to positively identify DNA traces of all their children.

Remember how they caught the Golden State Killer? They put a DNA sample into the genetics website GEDmatch and found a few of his distant relatives. They then used publicly available family history records to construct a family tree that included all of these matches. That allowed them to narrow down the suspects to two people. One of them could be ruled out by DNA testing a close relative, which left the last one. They then took a DNA sample from his car, which was a match and that's how they got him.

Using that kind of stuff to catch killers is likely a good use of the technology, but there's quite a few nefarious things a state could do with a DNA database of all dead people.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] echodot@feddit.uk 7 points 2 days ago (9 children)

Presumably the insights are just that he was a human and not a space alien.

What are they looking for exactly?

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 12 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Do dead people have rights? 🤔

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 20 points 2 days ago (9 children)

He's been dead for 80 years, that's plenty long enough for anyone's feelings to not matter.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] kn0wmad1c@programming.dev 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

According to the GOP, since the dead pay no taxes to America, they have no rights.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›