>But in a blog post that September, Kirkegaard wrote that when he went to download the new data, the consortium had put in place a new restriction: To access the trove, petitioners needed to first create an account, using an institutional email address, and they had to agree not to use the data to make comparisons across ancestral groups.
We need to fight fire with fire. Is there no other way to access the data? Could there be someone of sufficient “qualifications” to gain access to the data and then scrupulously pass it along to those “banned” researchers? Also, has any of this data been gathered with Federal funds? Can this be a way to force release of such data?
>But in a blog post that September, Kirkegaard wrote that when he went to download the new data, the consortium had put in place a new restriction: To access the trove, petitioners needed to first create an account, using an institutional email address, and they had to agree not to use the data to make comparisons across ancestral groups.
Baffling, the lengths they go to.
We need to fight fire with fire. Is there no other way to access the data? Could there be someone of sufficient “qualifications” to gain access to the data and then scrupulously pass it along to those “banned” researchers? Also, has any of this data been gathered with Federal funds? Can this be a way to force release of such data?