From: Hal Finney (hal@rain.org)
Date: Fri Nov 20 1998 - 12:59:08 MST
Ken Meyering, <ken@define.com>, writes:
> Why not use MEMS scanning mirrors with a single pixel photodetector?
> (Sort of the reverse of a laser beam scanner, on a very small scale.)
I think the same resolution problems arise when you are using a very tiny
mirror. It may be that lasers have it easier since their light is
coherent. I would have to do some research into these issues if you
want more detail.
> Or, rather than a gnatbot, use a mite-bot, that laches onto the
> eyelashes of the enemy's weapons designers, and sees everything they
> see (even if in an HMD). Maybe they can bore into the eyeballs and
> set-up a small area on the blind spot (optic disc).
>
> See http://www.science.wayne.edu/~wpoff/cor/sen/visanat.html
>
> From there, maybe crawl back along the optic nerve into the brain,
> and start rewiring things. Hook up some some detector and
> stimulator networks in Broca's and Wernicke's areas. This should
> enable signal intercepts within the individuals cognition process, as
> well as enable modification of their interpersonal semantic
> exchanges.
That's the problem with these extrapolations. We quickly spin off into a
neverland of inconceivably advanced technology. If there are mite-bots
crawling into the brain, probably there are immune-system bots to fight
them off. It's not obvious which side will win. Until we know, the
jury is still out about how much privacy will be possible in the future.
Hal
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:49:49 MST