Cyberpunk, the Postglobal and the Posthuman

DNA for Delivery

So what would you do if a corporation knew your future health risks, family history, physical traits, and even susceptibility to certain behaviors? And what if they could take that information and sell it to the highest bidder? Well, let me introduce you to 23andMe. It’s a corporation that takes the idea that you can send in a DNA swab and they will use that information to trace your family history. This type of testing is called direct-to-consumer DNA testing. Users send in their saliva and receive ancestry data and health predispositions. But the issue is that data is stored, analyzed, and shared technically with consent, but often hidden in fine print that most people do not fully understand. The California Consumer Privacy Act classifies genetic data as “sensitive personal information alongside data such as race, ethnicity, Social Security numbers, phone numbers, or address.” That puts the 23andMe in a unique position to share or sell that information to pharmaceutical companies and other corporations that are interested in the DNA and family lineage of the population.

Did You Read the Fine Print?

There have been multiple reports of individuals submitting their DNA to different companies and receiving conflicting results. A study from ASCLS “identified that 40% of all DTC genetic test abnormal results were false positives.” That alone raises questions about how reliable this information really is. On top of that, this data is not heavily regulated. The FDA and HIPAA do not fully apply to the direct-to-consumer testing industry. Instead, the government relies on the Federal Trade Commission to oversee data protection, but there has been limited regulation, allowing companies to largely self-regulate their privacy practices. Which sounds fine in theory, but not so much in practice. A 2018 survey revealed that” over 40% of companies did not even have documentation explaining how they protect genetic data.”At the same time, when people click “agree,” they are not fully understanding future data use or third-party partnerships. So while it looks like informed consent, it’s not always truly informed. This matters because genetic data doesn’t just reveal information about you but it also reveals information about your family members and even entire populations.

Tyrell-esc

In Blade Runner, the Tyrell Corporation manufactures humans and controls their identity and lifespan. While 23andMe doesn’t create humans, it helps to map and therefore monetize them on a biological level. In both cases, corporations gain power over what defines a human being. This parallel becomes even more concerning when considering how that data can be used. In Blade Runner, replicants are tracked and controlled because their creators hold complete knowledge over their biological makeup. Similarly, when a company holds detailed genetic data, it gains a form of informational control that can influence healthcare decisions, research, and future technologies. Looking at this globally, the United States allows for more corporate freedom and weaker data protections. In contrast, the European Union has stricter privacy laws and stronger consent requirements. This shows that the issue isn’t just American, but it’s globally unevenly regulated. There should be a more standardized system for handling genetic information that doesn’t vary so drastically from country to country. I would argue that we are already entering an early cyberpunk future. Corporations don’t need to dominate physically anymore, they gain power through data ownership. Recently, 23andMe filed for bankruptcy and was bought by a pharmaceutical company. This means that a pharmaceutical company could potentially gain access to large amounts of genetic, health, and family data from users. Even though there are claims that protections will be put in place, history shows that these safeguards are often not enough.

Wake Up People!

This matters for several reasons. First, there are serious medical implications. The unreliability of DTC testing, especially the high rate of false positives, raises concerns about how this data could be used to inform decisions made by pharmaceutical companies. Second, it impacts trust in healthcare and laboratory science. If people rely on private companies for genetic testing and pharmaceutical companies act on that data, it raises a bigger question of where healthcare professionals fit into patient care? At the end of the day, we have to think about who controls biological data. Right now, it is largely controlled by private corporations and pharmaceutical companies. This type of data should be more heavily regulated and ethically managed. Because the future of humanity might not be controlled by those who create life, but by those who own the code of it.

AI Attestation

The AI CHATGPT was utilized to help brainstorm ideas, organize the outline, and revise writing for clarity, grammar, and flow. https://chatgpt.com/share/69efe626-9200-83ea-a765-1e8c72ff87b9

References

Allyse, M. (2013). 23 and Me, We, and You: direct-to-consumer genetics, intellectual property, and informed consent. Trends in Biotechnology, 31(2), 68–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2012.11.007 Gunsolus, B. (2019, May 29). IMPLICATIONS OF DIRECT-TO-CONSUMER GENETIC TESTING - ASCLS. ASCLS. https://ascls.org/implications-of-direct-to-consumer-genetic-testing/ Jamali, L. (2025, May 19). Struggling DNA testing firm 23andMe to be bought for $256m. BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0ln0e5g6kgoPustell , E. (2021, July 19). The Onero Institute. The Onero Institute.https://www.oneroinstitute.org/content/genetic-data-protections-in-the-us-and-eu

It Doesn’t Feel Like Fiction Anymore

I used to think cyberpunk was doing a bit too much. Corporations running everything and treating people like they’re disposable felt exaggerated. But the more I started paying attention to how certain companies actually operate, the more that line between fiction and reality started to blur. Not completely dystopian, but close enough to make you pause for a second.

Take Amazon. It’s known for convenience, but behind that is a system where workers are managed heavily by algorithms. Reports from The New York Times and MIT Technology Review explain how warehouse employees are constantly monitored, with productivity tracked in real time. In some cases, those systems can even determine discipline or termination with little human involvement. This article explains it clearly: . That kind of setup feels very similar to Neuromancer, where human labor is reduced to output and efficiency rather than treated with care.

When Convenience Comes at a Cost

The same idea shows up in how information is controlled. Meta and Google collect huge amounts of user data and use it to decide what people see online. According to Reuters, these data-driven systems have influenced political messaging and voter behavior, which raises real concerns about how much control these companies have over public perception. This piece explains more: . It reflects the same quiet but powerful influence we see in Blade Runner, where corporations shape not just technology but how reality is experienced.

Who Really Controls the Narrative?

Healthcare makes this even more real. Eli Lilly has faced major criticism over insulin pricing in the United States. A New York Times report highlights how some patients have had to ration insulin because of the cost. shows how serious that situation is. This mirrors Machinehood, where access to essential resources depends on corporate decisions rather than basic need. It stops feeling like a distant issue and starts feeling personal, especially when something so essential becomes tied to profit.

So… Are We Heading There?

I don’t think we are fully living in a cyberpunk world, but I do think we are moving in that direction in certain ways. Corporations today have a lot of influence because of technology, global reach, and sometimes limited regulation. In the United States, that influence can grow quickly, while places like the European Union show that stricter policies can actually push back on corporate power.

I also don’t think this is just an American issue, but it does show up differently depending on the country. Some governments are more willing to step in, while others rely more on the market to regulate itself. That difference really matters. It shows that this kind of future is not inevitable, it depends on choices, policies, and how much accountability people demand.

What makes cyberpunk so interesting is that it is not just predicting the future, it is critiquing what is already happening. It exaggerates corporate power just enough to make the patterns impossible to ignore. It invites people to question systems that might otherwise feel normal.

We are not fully there yet, but we are close enough to recognize parts of it in real life. And I think that recognition is important. Because once you see it, you cannot really unsee it, and that is usually where change begins.

References

Hao, K. (2019). How artificial intelligence is shaping Amazon warehouse work. MIT Technology Review.

Herman, B. (2019). The cost of insulin in America. The New York Times.

Paul, K., & Jourdan, A. (2018). The role of data in modern political campaigns. Reuters.

Soper, S. (2021). Inside Amazon’s warehouse productivity system. The New York Times.

Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism. PublicAffairs.

AI Attestation

I used AI tools to assist with brainstorming and refining this post, but all ideas, analysis, and final writing reflect my own work.