# HG changeset patch
# User Christian Urban <christian dot urban at kcl dot ac dot uk>
# Date 1460030556 -3600
# Node ID e5d97ef272f90de391f11ec7519df5a86f474685
# Parent  5921eebd9add7c72407d3dd98bfe2be729509383
updated

diff -r 5921eebd9add -r e5d97ef272f9 hws/hw07.pdf
Binary file hws/hw07.pdf has changed
diff -r 5921eebd9add -r e5d97ef272f9 hws/hw07.tex
--- a/hws/hw07.tex	Wed Mar 30 15:02:21 2016 +0100
+++ b/hws/hw07.tex	Thu Apr 07 13:02:36 2016 +0100
@@ -46,7 +46,20 @@
       argument? (Hint: Think what would happen if the spy
       agencies and certain politicians get their wish.)
        
-\end{enumerate}
+\item DNA data is very sensitive and can easily violate the
+      privacy of (living) people. To get around this, two
+      scientists from Denmark proposed to create a
+      \emph{necrogenomic database} which would record the DNA
+      data of all Danish citizens and residents at the time of
+      their \emph{death}. By matching these to information
+      about illnesses and ailments in life, helpful evidence
+      could be gathered about the genetic origins of diseases.
+      The idea is that the privacy of dead people cannot be
+      violated.
+
+      What is the fallacy behind this reasoning?
+           
+\end{enumerate} 
 \end{document}
 
 %%% Local Variables: