This is from Augmentation, page 29:
QUOTE
The reasons for this side effect are complex, but I’ll try to keep things simple. Part of it is neurological, and part is psychological, and it’s rooted in the fact that while a neural interface translates digital data into sensory stimuli your mind can understand, the actual information carried is inherently different.
If you’ve ever had cybereyes, you know what I’m talking about. Cybereyes are essentially trid cameras. Fully wireless-enabled, tricked-out, low-light, image-linked cameras—but cameras nonetheless. The colors, contrast, resolution, aliasing, and depth perception are all different from what you would experience through your natural eyes. Many people find that this difference changes their experience of things, distances them from what they see, making it seem slightly unreal.
So...
QUOTE
To explain why it works on camera and not on eyes, I'd it's because it doesn't affect the lens but the sensor that's behind it
This might make natural eyes (and optical devices) immune, but cybereyes and electronic cameras are both methods of electronic imaging - both use the smae types of sensors and then send output. For cybereyes this output is usually DNI, and for cameras is can be too.
QUOTE
If cybereyes glint like a camera lens, they are going to be obvious as drek to the casual observer. I don't remember which edition or what book there was discussion about the nature o cybernetic replacements and how noticable the good "replacements" were, but it was talked about how it would take a close observation of the eye t notice it was cybernetic, and the higher the grade, the better the resemblance to the original, where with a Deltagrade cybereye, you would almost need an optical inspection intrument to figure out it was fake. That suggests to me that there must be some kind of "wet" effect mebrane over the eye. It may not be the case, but it's what I always assumed to one extent or another. OK, so it wouldn't necessarily translate into vulnerability to airborne agents, but i might be enough to fool an optical recognition system looking to automatically track and "engage" small dancing targets like flying micro-drones with cameras. It may sound like I'm just trying to back some kind of BS fluff into drekky game mechanics, but this is one of the situation where the drekky gam mechanics fit my take on the fluff. I assume that unless you select "unnatural" on the appearance, especially in 2070 with cloning and bioware being dominant if you believe the SR4 fuff, they will have put a LOT of work into making the implant as completely natural as they can get. With a cyberarm, they can pass everything but physical contact or very close inspection at the high levels.
So your dsconnect is merely in targeting, right? If the targeting parameters were changed - so that it actively seeks to shine in the eyes - you would agree that the blinding effect would apply to cybereyes.
QUOTE
Maybe the system just can't keep up with microsaccades very well. After all, your eyes move around a surprising amount even when you're looking at a stationary object. Handheld cameras don't.
This could well be true making targeting the eyes a difficult proposition, but it certainly wouldn't make them immune to blinding.
QUOTE
And if you did decide it could blind cybereyes or meat eyes, it should be defeatable by any kind of flare compensation or glasses/shades.
All the compensation in the world won't matter if the laser is drowning out all other input. It would be like trying to use windshield wipers to see out your windshield with a firehose spraying at it.
Cost is irrelevant to the discussion of "How does it work?" and I am simply not asking "How much does it cost?" so I won't be dragged into that pointless argument.
Throwing mud in a camera's lens and throwing mud in a cybereye (or natural eye) all result in the same effect - the image won't get through until the mud is removed. It doesn't fucking matter what the cost of any of the three pieces are - the mud still does what it does.
Now try replacing 'throwing' with 'shining' and 'mud' with 'laser' and we have the example I set.