Ah, so we're written in Lisp!

Wish I had mod points - I agree that a gun and a dog are tough to beat for home security!

Not every project... there's a curious lack of Java projects. But if you want to hack Python, boy are you in luck!

There might be all sorts of interesting bio-feedback applications. I was involved with a similar project about ten years ago, and one of our more interesting sessions involved connecting a number of sensors (primarily muscle tension sensors tracking electrical differentials across the skin) to the face of a trombone player who had some nerve damage on one side of his face. He couldn't really feel the "bad" side of his face, but kept adjusting until the readings looked the same as the "good" side, enabling him to play his instrument with somewhat closer to the technique he'd had before his injury/illness.

Props to that!

First, sorry - I did come across as a troll.

It bothers me to see generalized objections like this thrown up in front of a promising technology & line of pursuit, because it may throw up an artificial objection if enough people latch on. I think it's wrong to assume that the people working on this are idiots and won't apply disciplined engineering, testing, etc., as is done other critical systems.

Sure, there is the potential for bad things to happen, but there is also the potential for very, very good things to happen (e.g. respiroctyes), which I think can easily outweigh the bad (e.g. nano-based viruses) even if they do come to be.

To de-troll my first comment: software engineering isn't perfect. But it's benefits have far outweighed the drawbacks in today's world, and the consequences of failures are not less catastrophic than when put inside the body. Systems software on an airliner comes to mind. Current medical technologies already being put into human bodies also comes to mind.

Right, because software engineering today has made our world much worse off than it would have been without... enough FUD - somebody moderate this overrated please!

I'll stand by my generalization. Less than $3M = less possible revenue for the same multiplier. In their minds, why bother when they could spend the same amount of effort to do a $10M deal?

I'm sure there are exceptions, but this is the rule in today's VC market.

Yes, in principal. But that's not pragmatic - this sounds way too small to interest VCs these days. Speaking from experience, they aren't going to give you the time of day unless you're asking for at least $3M, and ideally more like $5-10M.

I'd suggest local angels (individuals, not angel groups which often think they are VCs and act similarly) if you want, say, $100K-$1M, and friends-and-family or revenue (can be from random consulting while the product ramps up) for less than that.

I don't know if there's anything specific to China, but NYPD has been doing some international "outreach". For example, as per the article below, I think Mumbai is outside of their jurisdiction...

http://www.newsweek.com/id/182526