>My conversation partner vehemenantly expressed his wish that >the system would short itself out, or otherwise permanently >destroy those memories upon his death, so that no one could >"rob his grave." Yet, I myself see this as a plausible, minor >form of immortality. > >What do you think? How will this affect society? Well, documents pertaining to the tenure of important individuals (such as US Secretary of State) are routinely archived and sealed until after their death. Family bibles are passed on to later generations, and old letters found in attics (less and less likely these days, where fewer and fewer people commit their thoughts to paper) were used to help historical researchers who were researching a famous individual (doesn't have to be you, could be a descendant.) While I can see where someone might want to have their personal augmentation destroyed once they die, I personally wouldn't care if my memories outlived me - after all, I'd be dead at that point! Unless you wanted to make sure nobody could take advantage of what you knew (perhaps you were privy to top secret research, but then you probably would be barred from using a recording device), or you wanted to make sure nobody could impersonate you (deep identity theft), I think it would be a non-issue. Deep identity theft might be the only reason to destroy a device (ie, someone tries to kill you and steal your identity, so you'd have a dead-man's switch installed), but wouldn't a smart identity thief just copy your data while you were alive and asleep? TC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TC Laihttp://www.ben2.ucla.edu/~tclai/root.html Director/Designer TLai Enterprises http://www.tlai.com -- Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" to
Wear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.blu.org
From Wear-Hard Mailing list Archive (WH)
Maintained by R. Paul McCarty
Archive created with babymail