TC Lai wrote: > 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? The way things are progressing in genetics, cryptography, and the Java ring, I'd hazard a guess that deep identity theft will be harder - the info just won't be digital, but almost intrinsic to your person - retinal scan used as a passphrase for public-keyt encryption, frex. Now, getting inside your head would be more informative, for a psych or a psycho, but I can see that identity might get harder to steal. -- Pete Hardie | Goalie, DVSG Dart Team Scientific Atlanta | Digital Video Services Group | -- Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" toWear-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