Hope this isn’t a repeated submission. Funny how they’re trying to deflect blame after they tried to change the EULA post breach.

  • Hegar@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    Hi! If you’ve used it, there’s something I was curious about - how many people’s names did it show you?

    If 50%+ of the 14000 had the feature enabled, it was showing an average of 500-1000 “relatives”. Was that what you saw? What degree of relatedness did they have?

    I don’t think that opting in changes a company’s responsibility to not launch a massive, inevitable data security risk, but tbh I’m less interested in discussing who’s to blame than I am in hearing more about your experience using the feature. Thanks in advance!

    • jimbo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 months ago

      This list shows 1500 people for me. I assume that’s just some arbitrary limit to the number of results. There’s significantly overlap in the relationship lists, so the total number of people with data available is less than the (14000 x 0.5 x 1500) than the math might indicate.

      My list of possible relations goes from 25% to 0.28% shared DNA. That’s half-sibling down to 4th cousin (shared 3rd-great-grandparents).

      The only thing I can see for people who I haven’t “connected” with is our shared ancestry and general location (city or state) if they share it. I can see “health reports” if the person has specifically opted to share it with me after “connecting”.