[ExI] cybernetic hate crime?

[Eugen Leitl]

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 06:36:52PM -0400, Mike Dougherty wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 9:00 AM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> > The reason I write about this is that it is easy to imagine these kinds of
> > devices becoming common soon, since memory has rather suddenly become cheap
> > enough and power-frugal enough that wearable computers can do a lot of
> > useful tasks.  As a society, we need to get over the fact that anyone can
> > digitally record anything we do in public.

The only reason I'm not recording at least my commute is expense of
a FullHD sports camera. I expect to record continuously and push it
into the cloud as soon as Google glasses or a similiar product will 
become available (2013 or 2014). 
 
> I understand the surgical interface may be a requirement for full
> integration with biology, but it seems this kind of abuse would make
> obvious that a break-away design would be a wise feature.  I think it

In general if you're recording and wearing a HUD with I/O
capability you can also have highly targetable defense systems
which can be potentially triggered very quickly.

These do not need to be lethal (e.g. a metal storm clip)
as a blinding laser or disabling spray (I routinely carry two
cans of mace when biking, and had to use one just yesterday)
would be a deterrent to casual attackers.

> makes more sense to degrade gracefully all the way to "no signal" than
> to risk imminent death from a violent disconnect.  (Not saying that
> was true of this case but in general)