PDA

View Full Version : No more Family Finder uploads to GEDmatch?



C J Wyatt III
03-17-2016, 12:09 AM
What is going on?

Notice on GEDmatch homepage:

"NOTICE: We are no longer accepting FTDNA DNA kit uploads. We have been asked not to say why. Please Contact FTDNA if you have any questions"

BalkanKiwi
03-17-2016, 12:21 AM
What is going on?

Notice on GEDmatch homepage:

"NOTICE: We are no longer accepting FTDNA DNA kit uploads. We have been asked not to say why. Please Contact FTDNA if you have any questions"

Brutal. Perhaps FTDNA feels that Gedmatch basically does what they do for free, and in most cases the calculators do a better job?

leonardo
03-17-2016, 12:28 AM
Really disappointing. The ancestry tools, and the ability to compare with those who have tested elsewhere is invaluable.

Táltos
03-17-2016, 12:28 AM
I just saw this, awful.

I'll be migrating this thread to the Open Source section of the forum shortly. http://www.anthrogenica.com/forumdisplay.php?138-Open-Source-Projects

ancestryfan1994
03-17-2016, 12:34 AM
Or maybe its because they realized GEDmatch was picking up segments that they failed to detect, I know they have had a few emails (myself included), over why their system fails to detect segments. Their family finder relative detector is way too strict, and people have confronted them about it.

C J Wyatt III
03-17-2016, 12:46 AM
Or maybe its because they realized GEDmatch was picking up segments that they failed to detect, I know they have had a few emails (myself included), over why their system fails to detect segments. Their family finder relative detector is way too strict, and people have confronted them about it.

The way I read the notice, GEDmatch is that one which is not accepting. Maybe GM wants a change that FTDNA is not sure about.

Jack

ancestryfan1994
03-17-2016, 12:49 AM
The way I read the notice, GEDmatch is that one which is not accepting. Maybe GM wants a change that FTDNA is not sure about.

Jack

Have you reached out to people running the site?

ArmandoR1b
03-17-2016, 12:55 AM
The way I read the notice, GEDmatch is that one which is not accepting. Maybe GM wants a change that FTDNA is not sure about.

Jack

That doesn't make sense. Gedmatch wouldn't attempt to push changes at FTDNA. Gedmatch wouldn't say "We have been asked not to say why. Please Contact FTDNA if you have any questions" if it was Gedmatch that made the decision to stop accepting FTDNA kit uploads.

Osiris
03-17-2016, 12:59 AM
That doesn't make sense. Gedmatch wouldn't attempt to push changes at FTDNA. Gedmatch wouldn't say "We have been asked not to say why. Please Contact FTDNA if you have any questions" if it was Gedmatch that made the decision to stop accepting FTDNA kit uploads.

This is what I'm thinking too. Sounds like FTDNA sent Gedmatch a letter to cease and desist. What's the point of having raw data if we can't use it? Hopefully customer pressure helps resolve this quickly and in our favor!

miiser
03-17-2016, 12:59 AM
That doesn't make sense. Gedmatch wouldn't attempt to push changes at FTDNA. Gedmatch wouldn't say "We have been asked not to say why. Please Contact FTDNA if you have any questions" if it was Gedmatch that made the decision to stop accepting FTDNA kit uploads.

My guess is that FTDNA purchased GEDmatch or has some kind of financial agreement designed to keep customers within the FTDNA fish bowl. This is the only reason I can think of that GEDmatch would go along with FTDNA's wishes. Pretty sure FTDNA doesn't have any legal basis by which they could prevent GEDmatch from accepting FTDNA kits except through a voluntary agreement.

leonardo
03-17-2016, 01:00 AM
Or maybe its because they realized GEDmatch was picking up segments that they failed to detect, I know they have had a few emails (myself included), over why their system fails to detect segments. Their family finder relative detector is way too strict, and people have confronted them about it.

This was my first thought. I have had sizeable matches, near 10cM, over 3000 SNPs, yet this match is not found at FTDNA. To me, this is a rather reliable match. I found it at Gedmatch, but not at FTDNA. Matches like this will now be missed. This step really devalues the autosomal test at FTDNA.

C J Wyatt III
03-17-2016, 01:02 AM
??? "We are no longer accepting FTDNA DNA kit uploads" ???

miiser
03-17-2016, 01:10 AM
This is what I'm thinking too. Sounds like FTDNA sent Gedmatch a letter to cease and desist. What's the point of having raw data if we can't use it? Hopefully customer pressure helps resolve this quickly and in our favor!

We'll see how much longer that raw data lasts... BAM files stopped being offered for Big Y pending system upgrades, so we're told. A pattern developing perhaps?

BalkanKiwi
03-17-2016, 01:12 AM
In all honesty, Gedmatch isn't "free" to a certain extent, because you have to pay one of the testing companies in order to get autosomal data to then use. Not bashing the good folks at Gedmatch at all. It's about FTDNA potentially wanting to make revenue off what is a free and educational area is poor form.

It's not like FTDNA is losing money when you have to pay them in the first place.

leonardo
03-17-2016, 01:15 AM
??? "We are no longer accepting FTDNA DNA kit uploads" ???

Yes, but what follows, " We have been asked not to say why. Please Contact FTDNA if you have any questions" appears to place the onus on FTDNA. Why else would Gedmatch write, "We have been asked not to say why?..." By whom? Somebody is asking gedmatch not to give a reason. That says to me, it is not gedmatch initiating the ban. The site then says, " Please Contact FTDNA if you have any questions." This says to me who has asked for the uploads to cease. FTDNA appears to be the originator of the request. I have emailed customer service FTDNA for their response.

leonardo
03-17-2016, 01:19 AM
In all honesty, Gedmatch isn't "free" to a certain extent, because you have to pay one of the testing companies in order to get autosomal data to then use. Not bashing the good folks at Gedmatch at all. It's about FTDNA potentially wanting to make revenue off what is a free and educational area is poor form.

It's not like FTDNA is losing money when you have to pay them in the first place.

Yes. As far as I am concerned, the raw data is mine in every way. It belongs to me, literally, and I have paid FTDNA for their service. It would be one thing if FTDNA added ancestry tools similar to gedmatch, but they really can't replicate what gedmatch offers. For those who are testing to find matches to unknown recent ancestors, every angle helps.

miiser
03-17-2016, 01:22 AM
Yes, but what follows, " We have been asked not to say why. Please Contact FTDNA if you have any questions" appears to place the onus on FTDNA. Why else would Gedmatch write, "We have been asked not to say why?..." By whom? Somebody is asking gedmatch not to give a reason. That says to me, it is not gedmatch initiating the ban. The site then says, " Please Contact FTDNA if you have any questions." This says to me who has asked for the ip;oads to cease. FTDNA appears to be the originator of the request. I have emailed customer service FTDNA for their response.

It does sound somewhat hostile and involuntary. Maybe GEDmatch was intimidated and too scared to stand up against a cease and desist, even if it was bullshit? I really can't see how such a demand would be legally enforceable. I just now double checked FTDNA's legal terms, and couldn't find anything that says FTDNA owns the raw test data.

ArmandoR1b
03-17-2016, 01:28 AM
It does sound somewhat hostile and involuntary. Maybe GEDmatch was intimidated and too scared to stand up against a cease and desist, even if it was bullshit? I really can't see how such a demand would be legally enforceable.
I wouldn't expect them to be willing to pay legal costs to fight a cease and desist for something they do with their own time and money for the community.

BalkanKiwi
03-17-2016, 01:31 AM
It does sound somewhat hostile and involuntary. Maybe GEDmatch was intimidated and too scared to stand up against a cease and desist, even if it was bullshit? I really can't see how such a demand would be legally enforceable. I just now double checked FTDNA's legal terms, and couldn't find anything that says FTDNA owns the raw test data.

It might even raise that question. We have paid them to process our DNA, but it's still our DNA and therefore data. That should not allow them to inhibit our use of the data for the sake of increasing profit.

miiser
03-17-2016, 01:36 AM
I wouldn't expect them to be willing to pay legal costs to fight a cease and desist for something they do with their own time and money for the community.

No legal costs if it's bullshit. You just don't do what they ask you. If they don't like it, they can try to sue. But if it's bluffing bullshit, they won't, because they know they won't win and it exposes them to a counter suit and gives them negative publicity.

BalkanKiwi
03-17-2016, 01:40 AM
No legal costs if it's bullshit. You just don't do what they ask you. If they don't like it, they can try to sue. But if it's bluffing bullshit, they won't, because they know they won't win and it exposes them to a counter suit and gives them negative publicity.

I don't know how strong of a case they'd have. They would probably try and argue Gedmatch is hosting "their" data for free without permission.

Angoliga
03-17-2016, 01:58 AM
Hopefully there's some way to curtail this -- maybe GEDmatch will accept uploads privately without being able to publicly state so on their site.

For upload transfers, I can understand FTDNA not allowing GEDmatch to officially label their company's name on their site -- but legally do they have the right to stop how their users analyze their results? :nono:

...:violin: I had 3 older gen members of my family tested for the sole purpose of comparing their genomes to other distant diasporic GEDmatches ; their kits are in the FTDNA lab atm with results due in late April/early May. It's been quite the ordeal getting those FTDNA kits to rural Uganda and back to North America; i'ts a 6 month process from initial order to coordinating deliveries with relatives and the lab times. *had to vent that out

For my sake and many others, hopefully they'll reconsider with enough complaints from the Genealogical Community.

...anyone think a petition would be effective?:boxing:

a200839
03-17-2016, 02:19 AM
Sh!t, [email protected] I just received my relatives Y-111 results today and wanted to upload it to Gedmatch to add to all my other relatives there. WTF FTDNA??? I've spent a lot of money on FTDNA tests and rely on gedmatch for searching for relatives... Not a happy camper... :argue: :\

DBowden
03-17-2016, 02:33 AM
This is ridiculous.
This is going to cause a serious negative impact to the DNA genealogical community.

miiser
03-17-2016, 03:16 AM
I don't know how strong of a case they'd have. They would probably try and argue Gedmatch is hosting "their" data for free without permission.

Assuming this may be the result of a cease and desist letter from FTDNA . . . If I'm the owner of GEDmatch, I respond with a confidently worded, aggressive letter that essentially says: "You have no legal grounds for this demand. If you want to work out a business arrangement, we can make a contract whereby you give me $50,000 and I agree to no longer allow FTDNA data uploads. Otherwise, go to hell."

No way I'd let FTDNA bully me and get away with that.

Táltos
03-17-2016, 03:27 AM
FTDNA Facebook:

We have reached out to GEDMatch expressing our concern that their website could potentially lead to a breach in privacy of our customers. Given this, we proposed to discuss the subject with them, but in parallel we suggested that until further clarification and assurances that the privacy of our customers' records are protected, Family Tree DNA uploads should be suspended. We hope that with the cooperation of GEDMatch we can reestablish the uploads in the near future.
https://www.facebook.com/FamilyTreeDNA/posts/1094388363946877?fref=nf

miiser
03-17-2016, 03:35 AM
FTDNA Facebook:

https://www.facebook.com/FamilyTreeDNA/posts/1094388363946877?fref=nf

I had pondered the privacy aspect as a possible factor. But it's such a ridiculous argument that I dismissed it. The person with access to the account (the customer or their representative) is the only one who can voluntarily download their own data and upload it to GEDmatch. So there is no privacy concern. A person is free to publicize their own private data at will.

The privacy argument is probably just a pretext to keep the customer's data within FTDNA's ecosystem for profit motives. FTDNA has similarly used the privacy excuse in the past to restrict access to data in order to prevent Semargl from data mining.

Táltos
03-17-2016, 03:44 AM
I had pondered the privacy aspect as a possible factor. But it's such a ridiculous argument that I dismissed it. The person with access to the account (the customer or their representative) is the only one who can voluntarily download their own data and upload it to GEDmatch. So there is no privacy concern. A person is free to publicize their own private data at will.

The privacy argument is probably just a pretext to keep the customer's data within FTDNA's ecosystem for profit motives. FTDNA has similarly used the privacy excuse in the past to restrict access to data in order to prevent Semargl from data mining.

I agree this is not only ridiculous, but oppressive to the genetic genealogy community. Privacy at GEDmatch begins with having a login for starters. People are able to put fake names or initials on kits. Use different emails than their regular ones. Kits that are not their own, say a relatives' they obviously should have discussed at length with that person that they want to upload to the site. The pros of why, what can be done to protect their privacy if uploaded. How many have we seen with cartoon character names?!

MitchellSince1893
03-17-2016, 04:39 AM
I'm normally calm and am trying to withhold judgement/anger, but if this turns out to be a something other than a temporary technical issue, I will be pissed off to put it mildly...launching into a profanity laced tirade that would make even Donald Trump blush. :censored:

Gedmatch is the one place where you can compare people that have tested with other companies...plus it allows you to look beyond the filters/limits imposed by these companies.

If this had happened 6 months ago, before I was able to upload a cousin's FTDNA kit to gedmatch (a paternal line I had been a waiting a long time to find a match on), I would have gone ape $#!T

Mellifluous
03-17-2016, 05:52 AM
The good news is that you guys can convert FTDNA kits to a 23andme format so Gedmatch won't be able to know! :)

Mellifluous
03-17-2016, 05:56 AM
http://www.y-str.org/2013/06/autosomal-dna-converter.html

Here you go! You can convert FTDNA to 23andme using the application on this website.

miiser
03-17-2016, 05:57 AM
The good news is that you guys can convert FTDNA kits to a 23andme format so Gedmatch won't be able to know! :)

Smart! Maybe someone should put up a guide on how to do that for the computer challenged. Or, better yet, an online executable to automatically do it for you.

I see you posted the link to do this just now as I was typing. Thanks!

Mellifluous
03-17-2016, 06:02 AM
Smart! Maybe someone should put up a guide on how to do that for the computer challenged. Or, better yet, an online executable to automatically do it for you.

I see you posted the link to do this just now as I was typing. Thanks!

I might do that when I get the time :). And no problem.

vettor
03-17-2016, 06:20 AM
http://www.y-str.org/2013/06/autosomal-dna-converter.html

Here you go! You can convert FTDNA to 23andme using the application on this website.

can this program convert from 23andme to ftdna and then present it to GenBank?

BalkanKiwi
03-17-2016, 06:58 AM
http://www.y-str.org/2013/06/autosomal-dna-converter.html

Here you go! You can convert FTDNA to 23andme using the application on this website.

Next minute FTDNA will try and take it down, or make threats :\

Afshar
03-17-2016, 08:06 AM
I think the privacy issue, as was stated by FTDNA, seems logical. Otherwise they wouldn't even allow you to download your raw data and just only view it or so. It would become problematic for instance, if GEDmatch started doing autosomal tests.

miiser
03-17-2016, 08:12 AM
I think the privacy issue, as was stated by FTDNA, seems logical. Otherwise they wouldn't even allow you to download your raw data and just only view it or so. It would become problematic for instance, if GEDmatch started doing autosomal tests.

If the privacy concern were the real reason, then I think the GEDmatch website would say something along the lines of "We are temporarily disabling upload of FTDNA files until a privacy concern is addressed. Capability should be restored within a few weeks." Instead, we get "We are no longer accepting FTDNA DNA kit uploads. We have been asked not to say why. Please Contact FTDNA if you have any questions."

The wording and style of the message on GEDmatch has legal threats written all over it.

Afshar
03-17-2016, 08:18 AM
If the privacy concern were the real reason, then I think the GEDmatch website would say something along the lines of "We are temporarily disabling upload of FTDNA files until a privacy concern is addressed. Capability should be restored within a few weeks." Instead, we get "We are no longer accepting FTDNA DNA kit uploads. We have been asked not to say why. Please Contact FTDNA if you have any questions."

The wording and style of the message on GEDmatch has legal threats written all over it.
Yes but why would they do that? Maybe they are going to renew myorigins or something, otherwise Gedmatch is no threat to FTDNA.

miiser
03-17-2016, 08:26 AM
Yes but why would they do that? Maybe they are going to renew myorigins or something, otherwise Gedmatch is no threat to FTDNA.

If customers from competing companies can only see matches to the FTDNA database by paying to upload their own kit to the FTDNA database, then FTDNA stands to potentially make money from those customers who want access to matches within FTDNA's database. If the majority of FTDNA's database is accessible elsewhere, and a different company offers better value, then there is no good reason to choose FTDNA over, let's say, Ancestry.com. The database itself is what establishes a monopoly of sorts and encourages customers to stick with the same company. Without the exclusive database, you'd be better served by testing just with Ancestry.com and then relying on the free GEDmatch database for matches to the FTDNA database. Most of FTDNA's value lies in customers' access to their private database of potential matches.

The only plausible privacy concern I can think of that would maybe fit with the tone of the message is if there had been a data breach of FTDNA's server, and a large number of kits were downloaded without permission of the kit owners. That would justify a concerted effort to prevent publication of those kits. But, if this were the case, then FTDNA would have a duty to inform customers that their privacy had already been compromised.

Afshar
03-17-2016, 08:29 AM
If customers from competing companies can only see matches to the FTDNA database by paying to upload their own kit to the FTDNA database, then FTDNA stands to potentially make money from those customers who want access to matches within FTDNA's database. The database itself is what established a monopoly of sorts and encourages customers to stick with the same company. If the majority of FTDNA's database is accessible elsewhere, and a different company offers better value, then there is no good reason to choose FTDNA over, let's say, Ancestry.com.

The only plausible privacy concern I can think of that would fit with the tone of the message is if there had been a data breach of FTDNA's server, and a large number of kits were downloaded without permission of the kit owners. That would justify a concerted effort to prevent publication of those kits. But, if this were the case, then FTDNA would have a duty to inform customers that their privacy had already been compromised.

Did not think of that, but then, 23andme has a larger autosomal database. These kind of things are bad for the customers.

Mellifluous
03-17-2016, 08:30 AM
can this program convert from 23andme to ftdna and then present it to GenBank?

If you have a v3 23andme kit, then you can simply upload it to ftdna to get it converted to an ftdna format (or so I believe). As for Genback, you can convert your 23andme to a fasta format and upload it to GenBank, but I'm not sure.

You can convert it to fasta format here:

http://www.y-str.org/2014/04/23andme-to-fasta.html

Mellifluous
03-17-2016, 08:32 AM
can this program convert from 23andme to ftdna and then present it to GenBank?

And yes, this program can convert 23andme to ftdna, I believe.

MacUalraig
03-17-2016, 08:52 AM
It seems strange that this coincides with not handing out BAM files for upload to third party site YFull.com too...

Anyway as others have pointed out the workaround is convert it to look like a file from one of their rivals and upload it that way. Of course then FTDNA won't even get the 'advertising' that would have accrued from seeing their kits in your match list at GEDMatch so they are just shooting themselves in the foot, when they were already floundering in the autosomal sales competition.

evon
03-17-2016, 10:18 AM
It is due to security issues, I am sure it will be fixed soon..See the FTDNA Facebook page..


We have reached out to GEDMatch expressing our concern that their website could potentially lead to a breach in privacy of our customers. Given this, we proposed to discuss the subject with them, but in parallel we suggested that until further clarification and assurances that the privacy of our customers' records are protected, Family Tree DNA uploads should be suspended. We hope that with the cooperation of GEDMatch we can reestablish the uploads in the near future.

VinceT
03-17-2016, 10:36 AM
If customers from competing companies can only see matches to the FTDNA database by paying to upload their own kit to the FTDNA database, then FTDNA stands to potentially make money from those customers who want access to matches within FTDNA's database. If the majority of FTDNA's database is accessible elsewhere, and a different company offers better value, then there is no good reason to choose FTDNA over, let's say, Ancestry.com. The database itself is what establishes a monopoly of sorts and encourages customers to stick with the same company. Without the exclusive database, you'd be better served by testing just with Ancestry.com and then relying on the free GEDmatch database for matches to the FTDNA database. Most of FTDNA's value lies in customers' access to their private database of potential matches.

The only plausible privacy concern I can think of that would maybe fit with the tone of the message is if there had been a data breach of FTDNA's server, and a large number of kits were downloaded without permission of the kit owners. That would justify a concerted effort to prevent publication of those kits. But, if this were the case, then FTDNA would have a duty to inform customers that their privacy had already been compromised.

This is the most reasonable theory I've seen yet, but I'm hoping that this isn't the case. Knock on wood!

ArmandoR1b
03-17-2016, 10:37 AM
It is due to security issues, I am sure it will be fixed soon..See the FTDNA Facebook page..



We have reached out to GEDMatch expressing our concern that their website could potentially lead to a breach in privacy of our customers. Given this, we proposed to discuss the subject with them, but in parallel we suggested that until further clarification and assurances that the privacy of our customers' records are protected, Family Tree DNA uploads should be suspended. We hope that with the cooperation of GEDMatch we can reestablish the uploads in the near future.

That would entail a lot of changes at Gedmatch. Since Gedmatch didn't state that they are working on changes so uploads can resume it doesn't look like Gedmatch is willing to make the changes.

leonardo
03-17-2016, 10:40 AM
Assuming this may be the result of a cease and desist letter from FTDNA . . . If I'm the owner of GEDmatch, I respond with a confidently worded, aggressive letter that essentially says: "You have no legal grounds for this demand. If you want to work out a business arrangement, we can make a contract whereby you give me $50,000 and I agree to no longer allow FTDNA data uploads. Otherwise, go to hell."

No way I'd let FTDNA bully me and get away with that.

I hear you. I had regularly communicated with one of the two Gedmatch administrators in the past. A really nice guy. But they are just two men who have volunteered their time and money to create Gedmatch, maybe not much different than you and I. When a company with the resources like that of FTDNA (especially legal) asks you to stop, it may not be a battle worth fighting for John and his partner. If things become too much of a hassle for them, this site could go the way of many others. We have all seen websites we love just disappear.

ArmandoR1b
03-17-2016, 10:42 AM
This is the most reasonable theory I've seen yet, but I'm hoping that this isn't the case. Knock on wood!

There was a recent report of FTDNA giving the wrong Family Finder data to a customer and that customer uploading that file to FTDNA thinking it was their own file. That probably happened to more people than the person reporting it. That would also make sense as being the cause of concern since it probably happened to more than just that one customer that reported a problem.

ArmandoR1b
03-17-2016, 10:43 AM
I hear you. I had regularly communicated with one of the two Gedmatch administrators in the past. A really nice guy. But they are just two men who have volunteered their time and money to create Gedmatch, maybe not much different than you and I. When a company with the resources like that of FTDNA (especially legal) asks you to stop, it may not be a battle worth fighting for John and his partner. If things become too much of a hassle for them, this site could go the way of many others. We have all seen websites we love just disappear.

Exactly

leonardo
03-17-2016, 10:48 AM
There was a recent report of FTDNA giving the wrong Family Finder data to a customer and that customer uploading that file to FTDNA thinking it was their own file. That probably happened to more people than the person reporting it. That would also make sense as being the cause of concern since it probably happened to more than just that one customer that reported a problem.

But is this a reason to deny everybody? Seems like overkill. On my kits, those with FTDNA have uploaded the least. I have a plethora from Ancestry DNA, given the fact that they don't provide a chromosome browser. I used to see many from 23andMe, but I don't get many matches from them anymore, let alone a transference to gedmatch.

ArmandoR1b
03-17-2016, 10:54 AM
But is this a reason to deny everybody? Seems like overkill. On my kits, those with FTDNA have uploaded the least. I have a plethora from Ancestry DNA, given the fact that they don't provide a chromosome browser. I used to see many from 23andMe, but I don't get many matches from them anymore, let alone a transference to gedmatch.

I don't think they know for sure which people were given the wrong results at FTDNA. FTDNA didn't ask Gedmatch to take down the FTDNA kits that have already been uploaded so that also has to be taken into consideration.

Táltos
03-17-2016, 11:00 AM
I don't think they know for sure which people were given the wrong results at FTDNA. FTDNA didn't ask Gedmatch to take down the FTDNA kits that have already been uploaded so that also has to be taken into consideration.

If this is what happened, shouldn't FTDNA be able to figure out at least the batch it was in?

miiser
03-17-2016, 11:03 AM
There was a recent report of FTDNA giving the wrong Family Finder data to a customer and that customer uploading that file to FTDNA thinking it was their own file. That probably happened to more people than the person reporting it. That would also make sense as being the cause of concern since it probably happened to more than just that one customer that reported a problem.

Where'd you hear about this?

ArmandoR1b
03-17-2016, 11:17 AM
If this is what happened, shouldn't FTDNA be able to figure out at least the batch it was in?
You would think so but you would also think that they would be able to fix a lot of the other problems they have.


Where'd you hear about this?
The FTDNA forum. It could be an NPE but others posted that they also had the wrong person's results in the past and FTDNA had to fix the problem.

Just to be clear, I am not saying that it is definitely the cause only that it makes sense that they wouldn't want people uploading the wrong results. The other possible cause is being able to see the names and emails of matches of matches and so on.

A.D.
03-17-2016, 11:43 AM
How do you convert FTDNA kits to a 23andme format?

Angoliga
03-17-2016, 01:15 PM
http://www.y-str.org/2013/06/autosomal-dna-converter.html

Here you go! You can convert FTDNA to 23andme using the application on this website.

Thanks Mellifluous, you're a lifesaver -- any take on whether or not the quality of the genome would be downgraded when converted to the 23andMe format?

ArmandoR1b
03-17-2016, 02:36 PM
See the new message at the Gedmatch site

C J Wyatt III
03-17-2016, 02:40 PM
See the new message at the Gedmatch site

It gets worse:

"We regret we had to make the decision to stop accepting FTDNA DNA uploads. FTDNA has threatened to sue GEDmatch over claimed privacy issues. We have been asked not to discuss the details, because it would be to FTDNA's disadvantage. Suffice it to say that FTDNA's own site seems to currently violate these same issues.

We would prefer to work closely with FTDNA in solving this problem to everybody's benefit, but we have not received a response to any of our suggested compromise solutions. The technical obstacles to satisfying FTDNA current demands are significant. It appears that our only alternative may be to remove all FTDNA DNA match results from GEDmatch. The issues raised by FTDNA do not apply to kits from other testing companies.

We appreciate the overwhelming support GEDmatch users have expressed on public forums."

Darko
03-17-2016, 03:02 PM
It gets worse:

"We regret we had to make the decision to stop accepting FTDNA DNA uploads. FTDNA has threatened to sue GEDmatch over claimed privacy issues. We have been asked not to discuss the details, because it would be to FTDNA's disadvantage. Suffice it to say that FTDNA's own site seems to currently violate these same issues.

We would prefer to work closely with FTDNA in solving this problem to everybody's benefit, but we have not received a response to any of our suggested compromise solutions. The technical obstacles to satisfying FTDNA current demands are significant. It appears that our only alternative may be to remove all FTDNA DNA match results from GEDmatch. The issues raised by FTDNA do not apply to kits from other testing companies.

We appreciate the overwhelming support GEDmatch users have expressed on public forums."
this is very frustrating , gedmatch is a very useful site, I hope they will not remove the old FTDNA kits

Afshar
03-17-2016, 03:25 PM
It got worse

leonardo
03-17-2016, 04:04 PM
I have several relatives who wish to test and are seeking advice from me. If the above is factual, I can't recommend they test with FTDNA. Both FTDNA and 23and Me seem intent on shunning the autosomal tester. It seems like we are taking giant steps backwards in this area. What a shame.

firemonkey
03-17-2016, 04:13 PM
On Gedmatch-

We regret we had to make the decision to stop accepting FTDNA DNA uploads. FTDNA has threatened to sue GEDmatch over claimed privacy issues. We have been asked not to discuss the details, because it would be to FTDNA's disadvantage. Suffice it to say that FTDNA's own site seems to currently violate these same issues.

We would prefer to work closely with FTDNA in solving this problem to everybody's benefit, but we have not received a response to any of our suggested compromise solutions. The technical obstacles to satisfying FTDNA current demands are significant. It appears that our only alternative may be to remove all FTDNA DNA match results from GEDmatch. The issues raised by FTDNA do not apply to kits from other testing companies.

We appreciate the overwhelming support GEDmatch users have expressed on public forums.

ArmandoR1b
03-17-2016, 04:19 PM
It gets worse:

"We regret we had to make the decision to stop accepting FTDNA DNA uploads. FTDNA has threatened to sue GEDmatch over claimed privacy issues. We have been asked not to discuss the details, because it would be to FTDNA's disadvantage. Suffice it to say that FTDNA's own site seems to currently violate these same issues.

We would prefer to work closely with FTDNA in solving this problem to everybody's benefit, but we have not received a response to any of our suggested compromise solutions. The technical obstacles to satisfying FTDNA current demands are significant. It appears that our only alternative may be to remove all FTDNA DNA match results from GEDmatch. The issues raised by FTDNA do not apply to kits from other testing companies.

We appreciate the overwhelming support GEDmatch users have expressed on public forums."

That was exactly what I was referring to. I didn't include their statement since I didn't want to be the one responsible for making it searchable in Google.

Mellifluous
03-17-2016, 04:23 PM
Thanks Mellifluous, you're a lifesaver -- any take on whether or not the quality of the genome would be downgraded when converted to the 23andMe format?

I doubt it. It's just converting from .csv to text.

Osiris
03-17-2016, 06:35 PM
I really don't see how Gedmatch is doing anything which would violate FTDNA's customer's privacy because as others have mentioned FTDNA is not involved with my interaction with Gedmatch or DNA-Land.

But now with the kit conversion from FTDNA to 23andme it just makes their whole effort meaningless, a waste of everyone's time and completely ineffectual to anyone who wants to get on Gedmatch.

And it seems a little hypocritical as well. They allow you to load Ancestry.com and 23andme data to their database. But we're not allowed to load our FTDNA elsewhere? What if Ancestry.com allowed you to load your raw data there? Would they try and sue them too?

psaglav
03-17-2016, 07:37 PM
I'm normally calm and am trying to withhold judgement/anger, but if this turns out to be a something other than a temporary technical issue, I will be pissed off to put it mildly...launching into a profanity laced tirade that would make even Donald Trump blush. :censored:

Gedmatch is the one place where you can compare people that have tested with other companies...plus it allows you to look beyond the filters/limits imposed by these companies.

If this had happened 6 months ago, before I was able to upload a cousin's FTDNA kit to gedmatch (a paternal line I had been a waiting a long time to find a match on), I would have gone ape $#!T

That's me at the moment. FTDNA delayed my father's FF results for the THIRD time yesterday and I missed the chance of adding his kit to Gedmatch. Joy!

I saw the link and the application for converting raw data but unfortunately, I don't run a Windows. I guess I'll figure something out. IF and when I get the results.

leonardo
03-17-2016, 09:21 PM
To be fair to FTDNA, here is the verbatim response they provided to my inquiry regarding this situation:

We are reaching out to our customers to make some important clarifications to what is being published regarding GEDMatch stopping the upload of Family Tree DNA results.

1. Let it be clear: the DNA test results, including any raw data available to the customers through their personal page, belongs to the owner of the DNA record, and not to Family Tree DNA.

2. The owner of the DNA record, consequently, can voluntarily submit his/her results to any other outfit, so long as by doing so, the customer does not compromise the privacy of any of his/her matches, or any records in the Family Tree DNA database.

3. More than one customer that has uploaded their FamilyTreeDNA data to GEDMatch has contacted us about a way for people to breach the privacy of a person's Family Tree DNA record, when uploading their information to GEDMatch.

4. At the time of the publication of this note, GEDMatch does not have Privacy Terms, nor General Terms & Conditions published on their home page, or on their registration page prior to registering, and thus, customers are not aware of the potential privacy risks associated with uploading their data to GEDMatch

5. FamilyTreeDNA has tried to reach out to GEDMatch to discuss this subject to find ways to eliminate the risk of potential data breach. We were surprised by their unilateral note on GEDmatch about the discontinuation of the uploads in lieu of a fix, and the new note about supposed threats of lawsuits from us.

6. It is regretful that GEDMatch, who has been a long time business associate and whose owners tested with FamilyTreeDNA, misrepresented our concerns and precipitated a chain of events that could have easily being solved through dialogue.

7. Nevertheless, and always thinking about what is best for customers, we are open to discuss with GEDMatch ways to avoid the risks to privacy that they recognize to exist in their system and we encourage those that would like the upload to be reestablished and privacy issues being taken care of to reach out to GEDMach.

As always, we thank you for your continued support.


I am not sure what to make of the situation. Maybe gedmatch felt pressurized (subtly or not) and decided to bring the matter to a head, with the hope of some resolution. It would seem by FTDNA's response there may be some hope to resolve the situation.

Annette
03-17-2016, 09:39 PM
It doesn't seem to want to open on my computer even though I have the necessary windows. Any one with any ideas?

leonardo
03-17-2016, 09:42 PM
It doesn't seem to want to open on my computer even though I have the necessary windows. Any one with any ideas?

Are you referring to Gedmatch?

C J Wyatt III
03-17-2016, 09:43 PM
It doesn't seem to want to open on my computer even though I have the necessary windows. Any one with any ideas?

It was slow for me, but I finally got in. I figure people are copying screenshots like crazy.

Jack

leonardo
03-17-2016, 09:45 PM
It was slow for me, but I finally got in. I figure people are copying screenshots like crazy.

Jack

My thoughts too. There are 146 users online right now. That's one of the higher numbers I have seen. I do believe people fear losing valuable information.

ffoucart
03-17-2016, 10:02 PM
I think that the main problem about privacy is about the possibility to look at all the matches of somebody with only his/her number, and to find other people like this, even if you share nothing with them.

It is clear that some people could feel uncomfortable with the perspective, and if they weren't given enough information about such consequences, there could be legal issues.

Sharing is a fantastic thing if you are willing to do so. But if you just want to find more relatives, and not be contacted to other unrelated people, the way Gedmatch works is not satisfactory.

I think that with a bit more advertising about the consequences of uploading your data on Gedmatch, it could solve the problem.

But now, it would be a shame to lose definitely the FTDNA customers.

leonardo
03-17-2016, 10:08 PM
I think that the main problem about privacy is about the possibility to look at all the matches of somebody with only his/her number, and to find other people like this, even if you share nothing with them.

It is clear that some people could feel uncomfortable with the perspective, and if they weren't given enough information about such consequences, there could be legal issues.

Sharing is a fantastic thing if you are willing to do so. But if you just want to find more relatives, and not be contacted to other unrelated people, the way Gedmatch works is not satisfactory.

I think that with a bit more advertising about the consequences of uploading your data on Gedmatch, it could solve the problem.

But now, it would be a shame to lose definitely the FTDNA customers.

Hasn't every kit on Gedmatch been willingly uploaded? I understand some have been done by an administrator of the kit, which may not be the person him/herself, but at some point the person consented to test and trusted the person who is administering the account. For example, I requested my mother to test. She has little interest but agreed. I administer her test and I have placed her results on gedmatch. If she had an issue with this, it should be taken up with me. I don't know how FTDNA or gedmatch would be liable. After all, my mother tested of her own volition and gave me permission to administer it.

ffoucart
03-17-2016, 10:30 PM
I think that some people didn't understood clearly how Gedmatch works.

Look at 23andme's forums: if somebody ask if his/her 1% Ashkenazy is real, the answer will be "go to Gedmatch". You think you have not enough relatives? "Go to Gedmatch". I don't think that all these people have fully understand the consequences.

Even if I don't understand the logics behind it, I see many people saying "OK to share, but only with my close relatives".

This a bit stupid, because you can have a close relative without sharing DNA with him/her (or only small segments). But anyway, this is like this.

Now, if it is clear to everyone that Gedmatch means that you share your data with everyone owning a Gedmatch account, I think the problem would be solved.

ArmandoR1b
03-17-2016, 10:48 PM
This FTDNA problem with Gedmatch is like the French government making direct-to-consumer DNA testing illegal or the U.S. government making it illegal to have direct-to-consumer DNA testing for medical purposes without the government's approval. They are making decisions on the customers' behalf even though the customer doesn"t want them making those decisions for them.

miiser
03-17-2016, 11:32 PM
We would prefer to work closely with FTDNA in solving this problem to everybody's benefit, but we have not received a response to any of our suggested compromise solutions. The technical obstacles to satisfying FTDNA current demands are significant.

This suggests that the privacy explanation really is just a pretext to squash GEDmatch because they are a perceived threat to FTDNA's business model. FTDNA refuses to discuss GEDmatch's proposed solutions, and they deliberately make the demands impossibly high to meet. This is legal code for "Our stated intent is a cover for our hidden agenda."

Honestly, if i were GEDmatch, I really would tell them to go to hell. Legally, FTDNA doesn't have a leg to stand on.

Theconqueror
03-17-2016, 11:39 PM
By the way, this the disclaimer from FTDNA on their download page.:

Disclaimer: We are committed to protecting the privacy of our customers. By downloading any raw data or reports you hereby indicate that you are the owner of that data or have permission to download the data, and you further indicate your understanding that Family Tree DNA cannot in any way guarantee the security or privacy of your downloaded data. Furthermore, you understand that by linking your raw data to your name, Family Tree DNA kit number, email address, or any other identifying information, the security of your raw data and record is further put at risk. By downloading your raw data, you release Family Tree DNA from any privacy violation that results either directly or indirectly from the downloaded raw data.

miiser
03-17-2016, 11:42 PM
5. FamilyTreeDNA has tried to reach out to GEDMatch to discuss this subject to find ways to eliminate the risk of potential data breach. We were surprised by their unilateral note on GEDmatch about the discontinuation of the uploads in lieu of a fix, and the new note about supposed threats of lawsuits from us.

6. It is regretful that GEDMatch, who has been a long time business associate and whose owners tested with FamilyTreeDNA, misrepresented our concerns and precipitated a chain of events that could have easily being solved through dialogue.

7. Nevertheless, and always thinking about what is best for customers, we are open to discuss with GEDMatch ways to avoid the risks to privacy that they recognize to exist in their system and we encourage those that would like the upload to be reestablished and privacy issues being taken care of to reach out to GEDMach.


I don't buy it. This whole statement looks like a planned legal stance that was strategically written before GEDmatch ever even responded. Either FTDNA threatened to sue, or they didn't. There's no motive for GEDmatch to claim that FTDNA threatened to sue, and to behave as if this is the case, unless FTDNA actually did threaten to sue. And there's no reason for FTDNA to demand that GEDmatch not speak of the details, unless the details make FTDNA look bad. I really think this is all part of a strategic move by FTDNA to maintain control of their database. Sure, they acknowledge that customers are owners of their data. It would be bad publicity if they denied this or changed this policy. But that doesn't mean they like the idea of their database being replicated on an external website. They attempted to squash Semargl, and now they're attempting to squash GEDmatch.

lgmayka
03-18-2016, 12:27 AM
4. At the time of the publication of this note, GEDMatch does not have Privacy Terms, nor General Terms & Conditions published on their home page, or on their registration page prior to registering, and thus, customers are not aware of the potential privacy risks associated with uploading their data to GEDMatch
As far as I can tell, this is indeed true: The Gedmatch web site has no terms&conditions whatsoever. By current American legal standards, this is totally unacceptable. Yes, it invites lawsuits.


7. Nevertheless, and always thinking about what is best for customers, we are open to discuss with GEDMatch ways to avoid the risks to privacy that they recognize to exist in their system and we encourage those that would like the upload to be reestablished and privacy issues being taken care of to reach out to GEDMach.
The fact that a Gedmatch ID is guessable from the FTDNA kit number, and vice-versa, has always been a potential privacy issue. Does Gedmatch provide a way to choose an ID different from the auto-generated one?

leonardo
03-18-2016, 12:49 AM
It's indicative of the times, but I, for one, am so tired of legal liabilities squashing good things. I understand there is always somebody ready to sue. Once again, one or a few, ruin things for all. This is indeed reminiscent of the Semargl website controversy. If you upload your dna to places like gedmatch (by either explicit or tacit approval), you shouldn't be surprised your information is visible. If you have had a change of heart, delete it and let the rest of us enjoy the intended and desired benefits of the site.

miiser
03-18-2016, 12:51 AM
As far as I can tell, this is indeed true: The Gedmatch web site has no terms&conditions whatsoever. By current American legal standards, this is totally unacceptable. Yes, it invites lawsuits.

The fact that a Gedmatch ID is guessable from the FTDNA kit number, and vice-versa, has always been a potential privacy issue. Does Gedmatch provide a way to choose an ID different from the auto-generated one?

Even if there is a legitimate privacy concern at GEDmatch, the legal risk is all GEDmatch's. FTDNA bears no liability in association with GEDmatch's website. I don't buy that FTDNA's actions are motivated by concerns about privacy.

Táltos
03-18-2016, 03:35 AM
Consent to share DNA Test Results
by Kenneth H. Ryesky January 20th, 2016 10:19 am

Michael Cole swabbed his cheek and had Family Tree DNA (FTDNA) run a DNA test. He then became exercised that (A) FTDNA posted his full DNA results on one of the FTDNA Project pages; and (B. shared his results with RootsWeb.

Cole is now the lead plaintiff in a class action lawsuit against Gene by Gene, Ltd. the actual legal name of the entity that does business as Family Tree DNA. He has enlisted (or, perhaps, been enlisted by) Edelson, PC, a Chicago law firm that specializes in, among other things, class action litigation. This is not necessarily a bad thing. There are bona fide abuses whose resolution is best accomplished in the context of class action litigation. Quite often, however, the lawyers for the plaintiffs are the disproportionate beneficiaries of class action litigation. This posting posits no accusation or value judgment in such regard with respect to the subject litigation; as will be discussed presently, the litigation is likely far from finished and its outcome is not certain at this time.



Gene by Gene had purchased several liability insurance coverage policies from the Evanston Insurance Co. Evanston sought to decline coverage, but the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas has ruled that Evanston indeed has the duty to defend Gene by Gene under the policies.



Under insurance law, the duty to defend is broader than the duty to indemnify. Evanston must engage an independent attorney to defend Gene by Gene; they cannot just assign their own in-house lawyers (which would constitute an obvious conflict of interest). The lawyer they engage for Gene by Gene will have the duty to zealously advocate for Gene by Gene.



This case is likely to be in litigation for some time to come. It may well set precedent for various issues, including but not limited to (1) what are the voluntary consent standards posting an individual's DNA on the Internet; (2) what are the permissible bounds for DNA testing firms to share their information with one another; (3) what actions must and must not be taken to safeguard the privacy of DNA test results; and (4) what is the value of genetic privacy.


http://www.genealogicalprivacy.org/2016/01/20/consent-to-share-dna-test-results/

Táltos
03-18-2016, 04:24 AM
Not sure how true this is. Someone posted in the ISOGG Facebook group in the past few hours that they spoke to Curtis from GEDmatch. Supposedly he said that GEDmatch will not remove FTDNA kits that are already there. https://www.facebook.com/groups/isogg/permalink/10154079827632922/

However the GEDmatch website does not have anything up about this. Fingers crossed that they will!

lgmayka
03-18-2016, 10:25 AM
Here's some out-of-the-box thinking. What if the privacy issue has to do with the presence and number of X and Y chromosomes?

Historically, the classification into biological male and female (and only those two!) has been considered a matter of public record. But the current American regime considers the presence and number of X and Y chromosomes to be private medically sensitive information--i.e., entirely unrelated to gender, which the administration considers an artificial social construct with many different options--and (as far as I know) is now imposing their novel view across all of American society via discrimination lawsuits etc.

Does FTDNA's Family Finder raw data include information as to the presence and number of X and Y chromosomes? If so, the current American regime probably requires FTDNA to post a very specific warning that such raw data contains medically sensitive information.

leonardo
03-18-2016, 10:55 AM
Here's some out-of-the-box thinking. What if the privacy issue has to do with the presence and number of X and Y chromosomes?

Historically, the classification into biological male and female (and nothing else) has been considered a matter of public record. But the current American regime considers the presence and number of X and Y chromosomes to be private medically sensitive information--i.e., entirely unrelated to gender, which is considered an artificial social construct with many different options--and (as far as I know) is now imposing their novel view across all of American society via discrimination lawsuits etc.

Does FTDNA's Family Finder raw data include information as to the presence and number of X and Y chromosomes? If so, the current American regime probably requires FTDNA to post a very specific warning that such raw data contains medically sensitive information.

Other than this, there is not much one can garner from the results as they are posted on places such as a FTDNA Project and gedmatch, at least something sensitive. Is there?

BalkanKiwi
03-18-2016, 11:18 AM
Not sure how true this is. Someone posted in the ISOGG Facebook group in the past few hours that they spoke to Curtis from GEDmatch. Supposedly he said that GEDmatch will not remove FTDNA kits that are already there. https://www.facebook.com/groups/isogg/permalink/10154079827632922/

However the GEDmatch website does not have anything up about this. Fingers crossed that they will!

Imagine the anger if that happened.

lgmayka
03-18-2016, 02:00 PM
Other than this, there is not much one can garner from the results as they are posted on places such as a FTDNA Project and gedmatch, at least something sensitive.
Family Finder results are not posted anywhere on FTDNA's web site, and for good reason. FTDNA has long recognized that FF results--which include NPE evidence, adoptee relationships, ancestry percentages, etc.--are much more sensitive than posted Y-DNA or mtDNA results. FF results from children's tests are particularly sensitive.

Táltos
03-18-2016, 02:45 PM
Family Finder results are not posted anywhere on FTDNA's web site, and for good reason. FTDNA has long recognized that FF results--which include NPE evidence, adoptee relationships, ancestry percentages, etc.--are much more sensitive than posted Y-DNA or mtDNA results. FF results from children's tests are particularly sensitive.
This is true. FTDNA Project administrators have access to these results too when you join. That doesn't bother me. What can be a problem, and something I have witnessed. A co-admin of a project decided to list full names, locations, and ancestry results in an activity feed to a project member.

The group is private but it's 1,000 or so members did not need to see that information. Though I realize she was only trying to help. There was a better way to go about it.

Helgenes50
03-18-2016, 03:05 PM
Not only Gedmatch, YFull is in the same case
For the last customers Impossible to download their Bam file.

leonardo
03-18-2016, 05:08 PM
Not only Gedmatch, YFull is in the same case
For the last customers Impossible to download their Bam file.

Liability or not, moves like this are rendering the results as less valuable. Maybe a reduction in the price should be forthcoming to correspond to a reduction in the product provided.

JamesKane
03-18-2016, 05:55 PM
We should fully expect FTDNA to begin issuing BAMs again. The only concern should be will they go beyond their projected upgrade timeline.

miiser
03-18-2016, 09:27 PM
We should fully expect FTDNA to begin issuing BAMs again. The only concern should be will they go beyond their projected upgrade timeline.

There's no question of missing the upgrade timeline. As of today, they have already missed it. The original notification, given January 21, said "for the next 6-8 weeks". Yesterday was 8 weeks.

Ann Turner
03-19-2016, 12:33 PM
As far as I can tell, this is indeed true: The Gedmatch web site has no terms&conditions whatsoever. By current American legal standards, this is totally unacceptable. Yes, it invites lawsuits.

The "Site policy" document has been visible when I'm logged in for quite some time. The current version is dated June 20, 2015. Someone has pointed out that there is a link on the bare bones GEDmatch home page to "Site policy." Is that something new? It's basically a terms & conditions document, but without an "I have read this document and I agree" button to click.

https://www.gedmatch.com/policy.php

ArmandoR1b
03-19-2016, 01:11 PM
Someone has pointed out that there is a link on the bare bones GEDmatch home page to "Site policy." Is that something new? It's basically a terms & conditions document, but without an "I have read this document and I agree" button to click.

https://www.gedmatch.com/policy.php

Yes, that is new. It was not there yesterday morning.

Anabasis
03-19-2016, 01:37 PM
Yes, that is new. It was not there yesterday morning.

They should remove thier servers to Russia. Then problem would be solved.

ArmandoR1b
03-19-2016, 02:32 PM
They should remove thier servers to Russia. Then problem would be solved.

That would drive Robera Estes crazy like the old Semargl site did http://dna-explained.com/category/yfull-company/

It seems Roberta Estes is quiet on the Gedmatch topic although she uses Gedmatch extensively (https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Gedmatch+site:http:%2F%2Fdna-explained.com%2F) and is an FTDNA admin and will no longer use 23andme (http://dna-explained.com/2016/03/16/closing-up-shop-at-23andme-and-the-trap/).

C J Wyatt III
03-19-2016, 02:40 PM
That would drive Robera Estes crazy like the old Semargl site did http://dna-explained.com/category/yfull-company/

It seems Roberta Estes is quiet on the Gedmatch topic although she uses Gedmatch extensively (https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Gedmatch+site:http:%2F%2Fdna-explained.com%2F) and is an FTDNA admin and will no longer use 23andme (http://dna-explained.com/2016/03/16/closing-up-shop-at-23andme-and-the-trap/).

I would guess that she is working behind the scenes to get the true story before she says anything. But I am curious about when she will.

Jack Wyatt

Táltos
03-19-2016, 03:27 PM
That would drive Robera Estes crazy like the old Semargl site did http://dna-explained.com/category/yfull-company/

It seems Roberta Estes is quiet on the Gedmatch topic although she uses Gedmatch extensively (https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=Gedmatch+site:http:%2F%2Fdna-explained.com%2F) and is an FTDNA admin and will no longer use 23andme (http://dna-explained.com/2016/03/16/closing-up-shop-at-23andme-and-the-trap/).
Also an independent contractor for FTDNA. https://www.familytreedna.com/learn/personal-reports/creates-personalized-reports/

ArmandoR1b
03-19-2016, 03:41 PM
I would guess that she is working behind the scenes to get the true story before she says anything. But I am curious about when she will.

Jack Wyatt

Either she agrees that people should have understood what they were doing when they uploaded their files and that the site policy that already existed once an account was created, but prior to uploading a file, was enough and those customers have that right or she doesn't agree. It's pretty simple.

Titane
03-19-2016, 04:55 PM
That's me at the moment. FTDNA delayed my father's FF results for the THIRD time yesterday and I missed the chance of adding his kit to Gedmatch. Joy!

I saw the link and the application for converting raw data but unfortunately, I don't run a Windows. I guess I'll figure something out. IF and when I get the results.
To convert .csv to text, upload to Excel choosing space delimited values then save as text.

Ann Turner
03-19-2016, 05:14 PM
Yes, that is new. It was not there yesterday morning.
It appears that different people may be seeing different things, perhaps depending on dates and cookies.

This login page has a link to Site policy

https://www.gedmatch.com/login1.php

This one does not (and it's the one I saw when I first started nosing around)

http://v2.gedmatch.com/login1.php

AJL
03-19-2016, 05:54 PM
It seems Roberta Estes is quiet on the Gedmatch topic

She just posted this (https://wordpress.com/read/feeds/2877364/posts/966849781).

vettor
03-19-2016, 06:14 PM
It's indicative of the times, but I, for one, am so tired of legal liabilities squashing good things. I understand there is always somebody ready to sue. Once again, one or a few, ruin things for all. This is indeed reminiscent of the Semargl website controversy. If you upload your dna to places like gedmatch (by either explicit or tacit approval), you shouldn't be surprised your information is visible. If you have had a change of heart, delete it and let the rest of us enjoy the intended and desired benefits of the site.

same with linking your data through Ftdna to MyHeritage, Familysearch, Geneanet etc etc

question is what percentage of people want only to find families members trough trees and used DNA as a different means to achieve this .............data will be visible to many many people.

So its not just DNA/genetic sites

ArmandoR1b
03-19-2016, 06:14 PM
She just posted this (https://wordpress.com/read/feeds/2877364/posts/966849781).

That link did not work for me but this one does http://dna-explained.com/2016/03/19/family-tree-dna-and-gedmatch-dustup/

The following is just my viewpoint and not directed at you. Just my viewpoint on how she responded to two situations that used FTDNA account numbers.

I feel that she should have seen the "security issue" before. She promoted Gedmatch plenty of times before and knows about every way that Gedmatch can be used. She knew that real names and email addresses can be seen at Gedmatch and that FTDNA kit numbers are used for the Gedmatch kits and that we can see the matches of matches including their real names, their email addresses and their FTDNA kit numbers. If she was so upset about Semargl she should have been upset about Gedmatch even though Semargl was using screenscraping and Gedmatch wasn't they never posted real names or email addresses and it wasn't info that wasn't readily available on FTDNA project pages. If people were worried about security they should have used an alias and a new email address just for the Gedmatch kits, or set their kit to research, or not use the site at all before uploading a kit. The site policy was readily available before uploading files.

ArmandoR1b
03-19-2016, 06:23 PM
It appears that different people may be seeing different things, perhaps depending on dates and cookies.

This login page has a link to Site policy

https://www.gedmatch.com/login1.php

This one does not (and it's the one I saw when I first started nosing around)

http://v2.gedmatch.com/login1.php

In the past, I would notice that sometimes I would be directed to one of those addresses and at other times the other address but I never paid attention yesterday. The site policy was not always there at the login prompt though. Otherwise, many people would have stated that they have seen it there before. Also the following two sites that have screenshots, one with a copyright date of 2011-2014 and the other with a copyright date of 2011-2015 don't have the site policy at the login page.

https://stonefamilytree.wordpress.com/2014/08/03/how-to-upload-your-ancestry-dna-test-results-to-gedmatch/ and http://www.yourdnaguide.com/upload-to-gedmatch/

Personally it doesn't matter to me because you can read the site policy before uploading and during upload there are warnings.

AJL
03-19-2016, 06:26 PM
That link did not work for me but this one does http://dna-explained.com/2016/03/19/family-tree-dna-and-gedmatch-dustup/

Strange -- oh well, as long as people can see it somehow.

ArmandoR1b
03-19-2016, 06:31 PM
To convert .csv to text, upload to Excel choosing space delimited values then save as text.

23andme and also use the X chromosome so that should be added to the file. http://genealogy.stackexchange.com/questions/10461/how-do-i-convert-my-raw-familytreedna-familyfinder-test-result-files-to-ancestry/10464#10464

ArmandoR1b
03-19-2016, 06:34 PM
Strange -- oh well, as long as people can see it somehow.

It asked me for a login. When I hovered on your link the URL it looks like a feed link.

Táltos
03-19-2016, 06:36 PM
It asked me for a login. When I hovered on your link the URL it looks like a feed link.
http://dna-explained.com/2016/03/19/family-tree-dna-and-gedmatch-dustup/

AJL
03-19-2016, 06:57 PM
It asked me for a login. When I hovered on your link the URL it looks like a feed link.

That must be why, I'm logged into Wordpress.

ArmandoR1b
03-19-2016, 06:58 PM
http://dna-explained.com/2016/03/19/family-tree-dna-and-gedmatch-dustup/

Right, that is the link that I had put in post 104

Táltos
03-19-2016, 07:14 PM
Right, that is the link that I had put in post 104

Ah I see now. I was browsing quickly and only noticed your post 108. I too had trouble with the other link.

Ann Turner
03-19-2016, 09:52 PM
This announcement can be found at GEDmatch and the FTDNA FB page

Family Tree DNA and GEDmatch jointly announce that we are in serious conversations regarding issues that have resulted in GEDmatch discontinuing uploads of FTDNA data. Both companies recognize the importance of these talks to their customers and are committed to quickly resolve differences. We regret any inconvenience that may have been caused and assure our users that our primary focus and efforts are geared toward your benefit.

miiser
03-19-2016, 11:15 PM
This announcement can be found at GEDmatch and the FTDNA FB page

Family Tree DNA and GEDmatch jointly announce that we are in serious conversations regarding issues that have resulted in GEDmatch discontinuing uploads of FTDNA data. Both companies recognize the importance of these talks to their customers and are committed to quickly resolve differences. We regret any inconvenience that may have been caused and assure our users that our primary focus and efforts are geared toward your benefit.

And this is why, whenever FTDNA does something that's not in the interest of the customer, I make a big fuss in a public forum. FTDNA cares about making money. When their actions have a negative blowback that's large enough to possibly affect their future profits, they pay attention.

miiser
03-19-2016, 11:21 PM
Also an independent contractor for FTDNA. https://www.familytreedna.com/learn/personal-reports/creates-personalized-reports/

When I originally read Roberta's article regarding Semargl, I sensed that it had "corporate stooge" written all over it. So I wasn't a bit surprised when I found out that she had a financial relationship with FTDNA. I wouldn't trust anything she writes about the current GEDmatch situation.

miiser
03-20-2016, 03:54 AM
That link did not work for me but this one does http://dna-explained.com/2016/03/19/family-tree-dna-and-gedmatch-dustup/

The following is just my viewpoint and not directed at you. Just my viewpoint on how she responded to two situations that used FTDNA account numbers.

I feel that she should have seen the "security issue" before. She promoted Gedmatch plenty of times before and knows about every way that Gedmatch can be used. She knew that real names and email addresses can be seen at Gedmatch and that FTDNA kit numbers are used for the Gedmatch kits and that we can see the matches of matches including their real names, their email addresses and their FTDNA kit numbers. If she was so upset about Semargl she should have been upset about Gedmatch even though Semargl was using screenscraping and Gedmatch wasn't they never posted real names or email addresses and it wasn't info that wasn't readily available on FTDNA project pages. If people were worried about security they should have used an alias and a new email address just for the Gedmatch kits, or set their kit to research, or not use the site at all before uploading a kit. The site policy was readily available before uploading files.

I just read Roberta's article. It's just as overwrought as the Semargl article was, and there is a jarring contradiction within the narrative. She paints herself as a neutral observer without inside knowledge of FTDNA's actions, and attempts to distance herself from the fray:


From that point forward, what actually happened is unclear, is only known to the “people in the room” at the time and judging from the outcome, may well involve some confusion or misinterpretation. In any event, the resolution did not occur and GedMatch posted that they were no longer accepting uploads from Family Tree DNA. (For the record, I am not one of the “people in the room,” so I, like you, don’t know.)

But then she goes on to speak as if she has inside knowledge of the supposed privacy concern and is in a position to verify its existence:


The people who have figured out the problem, and there are a few, generally technology professionals, are doing what they should do and keeping their mouths shut.

It doesn't make for a believable narrative.

miiser
03-20-2016, 04:22 AM
The "Site policy" document has been visible when I'm logged in for quite some time. The current version is dated June 20, 2015. Someone has pointed out that there is a link on the bare bones GEDmatch home page to "Site policy." Is that something new? It's basically a terms & conditions document, but without an "I have read this document and I agree" button to click.

https://www.gedmatch.com/policy.php

This section from the GEDmatch policy suggests interesting possibilities:


We cannot predict what the future holds for DNA or genealogy research. We cannot predict what the future will be for GEDmatch. It is possible that, in the future, GEDmatch will merge with, or operations will be transferred to other individuals or entities. If that happens, the operating personnel at GEDmatch will change. That event would provide access to your data by people not currently involved in GEDmatch operations. If this possibility is not acceptable to you, please do not upload your data to GEDmatch. If you have already uploaded your data, please remove it from GEDmatch.

Perhaps FTDNA is concerned about the possibility of a competitor, such as Ancestry.com, purchasing GEDmatch and getting their hands on a large portion of the FTDNA database in the process?

Titane
03-20-2016, 02:09 PM
This announcement can be found at GEDmatch and the FTDNA FB page

Family Tree DNA and GEDmatch jointly announce that we are in serious conversations regarding issues that have resulted in GEDmatch discontinuing uploads of FTDNA data. Both companies recognize the importance of these talks to their customers and are committed to quickly resolve differences. We regret any inconvenience that may have been caused and assure our users that our primary focus and efforts are geared toward your benefit.
It's called NEGOTIATIONS! Gedmatch decided it was to their advantage to pull the plug on FT-DNA and go public. It looks like it is working for them...

ArmandoR1b
03-20-2016, 02:47 PM
It's called NEGOTIATIONS! Gedmatch decided it was to their advantage to pull the plug on FT-DNA and go public. It looks like it is working for them...
FTDNA had asked Gedmatch to suspend FTDNA uploads. That's why they pulled the plug.

http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6669-No-more-Family-Finder-uploads-to-GEDmatch&p=145835&viewfull=1#post145835 and even though FTDNA denied threatening to sue Gedmatch there is almost no doubt there was a cease and desist letter from a lawyer stating that http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?6669-No-more-Family-Finder-uploads-to-GEDmatch&p=145943&viewfull=1#post145943

Ann Turner
03-20-2016, 05:38 PM
Another "when did this happen?" question. The verbiage below shows up when you ask to download your FF raw data. It's been a long while since I downloaded data, but I don't recall this (or didn't pay any attention):

Disclaimer: We are committed to protecting the privacy of our customers. By downloading any raw data or reports you hereby indicate that you are the owner of that data or have permission to download the data, and you further indicate your understanding that Family Tree DNA cannot in any way guarantee the security or privacy of your downloaded data. Furthermore, you understand that by linking your raw data to your name, Family Tree DNA kit number, email address, or any other identifying information, the security of your raw data and record is further put at risk. By downloading your raw data, you release Family Tree DNA from any privacy violation that results either directly or indirectly from the downloaded raw data.

marosjor
03-20-2016, 06:57 PM
Someone on Facebook pointed that this is new verbiage too. If so, this is an effort to put the onus back on the person downloading the data which is the way it should be.

leonardo
03-20-2016, 07:41 PM
It's called NEGOTIATIONS! Gedmatch decided it was to their advantage to pull the plug on FT-DNA and go public. It looks like it is working for them...

There is no "advantage" for Gedmatch, as they are not for profit. They take donations. I have had my data uploaded for years to Gedmatch. For those of who have not, you don't remember the days when the site was offline often because the servers were not big enough to handle all the data. I have communicated a number of times with John Olson, one of the two administrators at gedmatch. At the time of the problems with gedmatch keeping up with demand, I would send a somewhat nasty email regarding what I have aforementioned. John would quite kindly and gently remind me that he and his partner ran and maintained this site, free of charge, on their own free time. So, unless things have changed lately, gedmatch receives no benefit from withholding FTDNA kits, except less work and headaches.

Petr
03-20-2016, 10:54 PM
Perhaps FTDNA is concerned about the possibility of a competitor, such as Ancestry.com, purchasing GEDmatch and getting their hands on a large portion of the FTDNA database in the process?
Do you know how many Family Finder results exist and how many of them are uploaded to Gedmatch? I randomly tried 60 FTDNA numbers and just one was present on Gedmatch.

PLogan
03-21-2016, 06:10 PM
New verbiage on the GEDmatch site:


We are working with FTDNA to revise in-common file transfer standards. When software modifications have been completed on both sites, we will resume accepting FTDNA uploads again.

:)

PLogan
03-22-2016, 02:31 PM
Family Tree DNA and GEDmatch jointly announce that we are in serious conversations regarding issues that have resulted in GEDmatch discontinuing uploads of FTDNA data. Both companies recognize the importance of these talks to their customers and are committed to quickly resolve differences. We regret any inconvenience that may have been caused and assure our users that our primary focus and efforts are geared toward your benefit.

We appreciate the overwhelming support GEDmatch users have expressed on public forums.