`law enforcement a means to potentially quickly identify violent criminals`
Go ahead and replace "law enforcement" with political group you don't like, and "violent criminals" for a group you do.
Go ahead and replace "law enforcement" with political group you don't like, and "violent criminals" for a group you do.
Sure, maybe not, but maybe so. It does happen.
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_unworthy_of_life - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_eugenics
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_and_the_Holocaust?wprov=...
Just as DNA can help you find who did a criminal act, it can track down who did a political act.
Resistances, opposition groups in some environments, etc.
Or a life insurance corporation seeing that you have predisposition for heart disease, and refusing to provide services to you.
I don't get your example. It's a private company and has a right to decide what risks it should take...Unless there is a government control over life insurance rules - why would an insurance company risk losing money? It's the same as charging an 80 year old man higher premium than a 20 year old.
If we have perfect (or near-perfect) knowledge, what would insurers do? Well, they'd charge you for exactly how much you're going to cost, plus some administrative costs, plus some extra. At that point, everyone's better off not having insurance.
That's exactly what I meant, government should be that entity that helps those on the rough end of the stick. Riding on the misinformation of life insurance company is not a solution either
But this is the very and only concept of insurance: misinformation on misfortune...
When I read about the government having access to identification attributes of the general populace, I recall that a focal part of the Nazi attempts to eradicate European Jews was actually finding them. One theory for why Dutch Jews were killed at a higher rate than neighboring countries was that the government kept religious affiliation as part of its census information. IIRC, the Dutch resistance made a semi-successful attempt to destroy the records before they could be used. I can't find a direct reference to that particular event yet, hence my 'IIRC', but the general context is laid out in Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Netherlands_in_World_War_II.
I think the point here is that even if a government is being innocuous in its information gathering, what happens if the government is then occupied by a group that is entirely not innocuous? This can get much more subtle than genocide: for example healthcare groups using data to try to remove people with certain conditions from their rolls.