the biodock is an idea for a hollow dish-shaped implant that is a container for other implants that can go in an out of it like a port. this allows for uprgradability and serviceability for implants. would likely be made of silicone (the same stuff breast implants are made of). strategies would have to be undertaken to make sure it cannot get infected if left hollow - it would have to be self-sealing.

here are some diagrams as to where potential biodocks can go. realistically, these considerations must be kept in mind:

1. the biodock must go on a fairly rigid part of the body, that will not flex or move too much even with full range of human motion
2. if the biodock is impacted and nudged out of place or even fractured, there will not be any catastrophic injury to the wearer

these two considerations leave us with only a few good options. most of them are where there is a large area where there is nothing between bone and skin.

1. skull
2. scapula
3. sternum
4. hip
5. kneecap
6. ankle

the rest of this document will be exploring various configurations and installments to the biostack to illustrate the potential of the biostack, while introducing various materials and techniques along the way. this is a proposal

the biometric kill switch (bmks) is an implant that has the main purpose to execute certain instructions on the wearer’s death or incapacitation. its form is a flexible radio transmitter dish on implanted top of the scapula that connects to an implantable loop recorder on top of the heart. later forms would also interface with devices that measure hormonal composition in bloodstream, movement, and brainwaves.

the flat form would ideally have some type of onboard compute to deduce weather the wearer is alive, asleep, in a state of panic, or dead, from the heartbeat. similar to an apple watch. much more advantageous for our purposes here compared to a tooth transmitter. it would go in a biodock.

the scapula placement is chosen for:

• potential solar recharging
• it is a minimally invasive and not dangerous surgery
• if impacted, the bmks has muscle underneath to cushion it (good for device and wearer) (the type of person who would want a bmks might be a person who gets into physical altercations)
• larger surface area allows for better battery life, better heat dissipation, more room for chips, larger dish transmitting area

a technically viable alternative placement could be on top of the skull, but that sacrifices too much aesthetic value for it to be used in practice.

a wearer would want a bmks for any reason involving instructions being carried out on their death or things being known at their death. these include:

• they want to avoid unjust imprisonment
• they want to avoid being silenced
• you’re a whistleblower
• there are details of their will they want to hide
• there are details of their work they do not want people to know until after they are dead
• confessions
• blackmail
• they want a simulation of their consciousness to take precedence over their former living consciousness

imagine you testified against your former employer in court, perhaps you used to work for boeing. now your former employer can’t whack you because it would set off your bmks and then a script would go off revealing all the heinous shit about the company. they can kill you, but they can’t kill your secrets. the bmks allows you to trigger when to continue acting, posthumously

the design for the bmks entails:

• flat cylinder/hexagon with rounded corners
• plastics? gels?
• phased antenna? (like the ones used in starlink terminals)
• solar cells under the skin?
• ideally a circular contact pad for charging

legal frameworks around prisoner’s rights for implants are extremely unexplored. I the author would like to see implants, even medically non-necessary ones, regarded as integral to bodily autonomy, and not at all (in the influence of the state). Potential avenues to explore for the sake of bodily implant autonomy in legal frameworks include:

• needs to be FEDERAL and not state dependent, perhaps even nationally codified in the UN for maximum effectiveness
• Prisoners retain constitutional rights to adequate medical care (Estelle v. Gamble, 1976)
• Removal could potentially be mandated as a condition of incarceration (similar to how prisons can require removal of non-medical piercings, grills, etc.) but this needs to be AVOIDED for implants

things to investigate include

• the viability of ml models written in forth
• hexagonally shaped chips
• solar skin