The further into the 21st century we go, the more virtual our world is becoming. Many people no longer carry cash, and make all of their purchases with a card. This trend is bound to continue. More now than ever, a great deal of money doesn't really "exist" in the traditional sense. It is just a number on a screen. The computer I'm typing this on was 700 dollars, but to buy it, I never handed anybody 700 dollars. I took a check with numbers on it to the bank and deposited it. From there I went to the internet and typed in the numbers for my debit card, and it took those numbers out of my account and gave them to somebody else. As more transactions are conducted this way, a larger percentage of our money will exist in this virtual state. Because of this, the real profits for criminals will come in cyberspace. Robbing a liquor store becomes unprofitable if nobody has bought anything with cash that day. The crime will go where the money is, so high-tech defense needs to be there to stop it.
Yes, a greater emphasis should be placed on stopping and preventing high-tech crime instead of low-tech crime, because we could receive a big payback for the amount of time and money that we would have to invest. We could develop algorithms that could detect a number of rimes at once.
Crime that's of the high-tech nature should definitely have greater emphasis on it. We know that high-tech crime can take millions away from people. Just look at the entire bitcoin thing that's happening nowadays. Downloading music is wrong, but it's low-tech. It's not too much of a problem if you ask me.
In my book crime is crime and it shouldn't matter what crime it is, if its known about, it should receive attention. High-tech crimes could potentially harm and victimize more people so this certainly warrants more concern than low-tech crime. At the same time it only takes one convenience store clerk death to assume that low-tech crime deserves emphasis as well.