Solar-Powered Augmented Reality Contact Lenses 213
ByronScott writes "Want eyesight that could put your neighborhood cyborg to shame? Well, University of Washington professor Babak Amir Parviz and his students are working on solar-powered contact lenses embedded with hundreds of semitransparent LEDs, letting wearers experience augmented reality right through their eyes. If their research proves successful, the applications — from health monitoring to gameplay to just plain bionic sight — could be endless."
Yes I Do Want (Score:5, Insightful)
Though now that I think a little more, a spam attack on your eyeballs could be troubling...
Looks Pretty Vapory (Score:5, Insightful)
It's in its "nascent" stages, years away from reality, and they mention that even a single pixel could be beneficial - already managing expectations downward. Seems like pretty good PR to me.
BTW, I'm working on teleportation. It too is in its nascent stages.
Bullcrap (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Fascinating (Score:3, Insightful)
Makes me wonder however if it would be self-contained (unlikely) or have to communicate with some hardware either broadcasting near your location or probably worn on your person somewhere.
Well, it's unlikely to have much processing power and still actually stay in your eye, but I don't see too much downside of it connecting to a small (or large depending on the requirements) wearable computer on a personal network for the processing of information or connecting to the web for information to correlate or display. e.g. If it's giving you directions to the closest ATM the wearable could get your GPS position, look up the ATM and then display little arrows on the lens. I doubt they can build this into the lens itself. That functionality may even be an app on your Android phone. That;s probably powerful enough to manage much of what folks would want. No need to lug around a whole PC.
Re:Hundreds? I count 64 (Score:1, Insightful)
So the first microprocessor wasn't revolutionary because it couldn't run Bioshock 2?
Call me when there's a demo (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Yes I Do Want (Score:5, Insightful)
Though now that I think a little more, a spam attack on your eyeballs could be troubling...
People always think of the best outcome when a new technology is created, forgetting the cesspool we call humanity that's going to use and pervert it. The day you have bionic eyes is the day people start paying good money to augment your "virtual reality" to replace competitors advertisements, add advertisements onto everyday objects surrepticiously, and what you'll end up with is drowning in useless information just as much now, sitting at your keyboard reading this, except you won't be able to unplug.
Most of my friends have the social expectation that if they send me a text or email, I reply in a few minutes, a half hour tops. Any longer, and they think something's gone wrong, and start calling me and everyone I know to find out what happened. God help us all the day we're linked continuously with each other over a massive communications network; Kiss democracy goodbye, privacy, anonymity, freedom, and the right to choose how you life your life goodbye. It'll all be auctioned off to the highest bidder. It'll be like Ghost in the Shell, with police, government agents, and large corporations being able to cloak themselves from being seen. And there won't be trials anymore -- the bionic eye's constant connection with the network will mean everything you see from the moment you wakeup until you go to bed will be available for review. They'll make their use mandatory because it results in zero crime. Or so they'll say.
It isn't fear-mongering to expect this. Not fifteen years ago when the internet was in its infancy, most of what was out there was high quality scientific research and most of the e-mails being sent were between real people, having real conversations. Today, it's a cesspool where 99% of what your inbox gets hit with is someone trying to sell you something. Every window into the web has advertisements hanging off of it. And here in Minnesota, the Supreme Court recently ruled that it was okay for people to be convicted of DUI if they could have been capable of operating a motor vehicle. People being thrown in jail because of the possibility that a crime could have occurred -- it is no longer necessary that the public (or yourself) be harmed for the law to reach into your lives. Today we live in a society where the merest possibility of a person engaging in a criminal act is sufficient grounds for conviction.
Technology does not change the way people think. Human intellectual capacity has not altered in the past 4,000 years (at least) as far as we can tell. We can laugh at people who believed the world was flat, but the fault is ours for doing so -- we did not understand how they saw the world. There wasn't anything wrong with their eyes, or their brains. We're fundamentally no smarter than they were. But we think we are. And we're so confident, so smugly superior to our predecessors that we know this future can't happen.
Of course there will be trials. And freedom. And democracy. And all that good stuff. We know it because, well, gosh darn it, that's how it has to be.
No.
No it doesn't.
All these things we value will die, and we can't blame technology for it. All technology does, this one included, is expose and direct us towards the fundamental question of what it means to be human. And let me just say -- that definition is not sunshine and rainbows. We were given free will. Nowhere in that does it say we are in any way inclined to do good; When it comes right down to it, very few people truly trust one another, and we'd believe our own direct sensory experiences over what anyone would tell us. We imitate others. That's all culture is -- the direct observation of our environment, which is translated into coping mechanisms (behaviors) that we then interpose between ourselves and it.
So tell me, where does that leave us when those sensory experiences become artificial and malleable?
Re:Yes I Do Want (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Yes I Do Want (Score:3, Insightful)
A well thought-out, on-topic response being modded as redundant? Even if you don't agree with the poster's reasoning, this certainly isn't redundant.
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yes I Do Want (Score:5, Insightful)
There's something about your posts that I find grating. I should try to figure out what it is.
I think maybe... pronounced certainty... that exacerbates the irritation of caustic cynicism... and contempt for non-cynical thinking which you polarize into a hyperbolic strawman to mock, gosh darn it... A kind of exaggerated, hateful, pessimistic misanthropic venting.
You "hold forth" rather than posit or ponder.
You talk about human nature and are quick to point out failings, but I'm guessing you'd be hard pressed to acknowledge prosocial inclinations.
Am I reading you wrong? Maybe I'm not remembering the character of your prior posts very well. Are you not cynical? Do you ever qualify any proclamations with "well, I'm not entirely sure...", "I think...", or "it could be..."? Or is it really all "damn straight -- people suck is how it is and I'm the person to tell it to ya, ya foolish dreamers"? Maybe it's more performance than measured analysis.
People always think of the best outcome when a new technology is created, forgetting the cesspool we call humanity that's going to use and pervert it.
But the very thing you were responding to was someone pointing out a negative application of technology? Yet, "people always think of the best..." Maybe this hyperbole isn't warranted? Especially just on the heels of a counterexample?
Experiences change the way people think. Sure, there are tendencies, but evidently a wide variety of outcomes -- have you noticed? -- which suggests thinking is pliable. Technology can enable experiences. Talk therapy is itself a kind of technology. Maybe technology itself doesn't change the way people think (modulo mood drugs... hm... and probably neurofeedback machines... okay, and maybe a number of other technologies), but technology can be leveraged. And that's a critical point which we ought not sweep under the rug mid-rant.
Message boards allow individuals to speak to a public of thousands or hundreds of thousands. That's powerful technology. What would you do with that kind of technology? Self-gratifyingly vent your gall bladder about the inherent and irremediable evil of humankind? But meanwhile thus paint an ugly picture of humanity for others to absorb? Did you know that the more we contemn and so fear others the less helpful we become? Indeed, the more we become the things we're hating? Selfish, ungenerous, unkind? Get my drift? If we call humans ugly we make it so. Technology has amplified your mouth. Watch your mouth.
I'm not suggesting we turn a blind eye to fault. Indeed, this post is all about calling you out on yours. We absolutely should be critical. Meaning we should apply our intellects to make fine distinctions in judgement. Being overly biased towards either gloom or rainbows is harmful. (Albeit, biased towards gloom more so.) Let us judge, and judge accurately, being wary of our emotions. Let's judge, but let's not be hateful or contemptuous. I don't hate you for your curmudgeonly ranting; hate doesn't improve anything. If you're upset about humanity's failings, I might suggest highlighting and promoting its good qualities. For example, you're obviously a clever thinker. Quite sharp. Seemingly a good arguer. I suggest that you take your mental gifts and apply them with a less cynical bias. Your life will be more pleasant, without losing any realism, and so will the lives of those around you. Including me. I make this recommendation for all our sake.
Next time I'm in Minnesota, you wanna grab a coffee?
Re:Yes I Do Want (Score:3, Insightful)
Mod parent up! Better to veer towards looking at things on the bright side - often it actually turns out that your fears are unfounded. My life has much improved since I started trying to focus on the positive parts of life. I still like to play devil's advocate and still could be considered cynical or at least detachedly rational at times, but I also try to foster good in myself and other people.
I was thinking similar things about her post but it's impossible to say that the things she mentions will not come true.. they'd certainly be possible in certain political climates - for example the current China - but I like to think that there are enough checks and balances in human nature to make sure that there will still be people in government who work to preserve dignity and privacy in our lives. There's also the fact that politicians have more to fear than most out of their lives being monitored, so I don't think they'd be too happy about this kind of tech being mandated.
Re:Yes I Do Want (Score:2, Insightful)
These not bionic eyes, they are contact lenses, and they don't have cameras in them.
You're right that such things could happen, and in some nightmare society, we could end up with compulsary bionics for monitoring purposes.
Buit this isn't anything to do with that.
And you could make this argument about any technological advance. "We've found a way to write in the sky!" "But what if the government uses it for propaganda?"
I also take issue with the social expectations paragraph. If your friends require you to respond that quickly, then you're telling me that you never take a shower, you never sleep, and you never have a social life that involves going to the theatre, the cinema, ice skating... need I continue?
And it IS fear-mongering to expect that. You're telling me that a government organisation (and it'll have to be one that does it) can organise bionic implants for every person in (your country name here) AND manage the massive network and storage infrastructure that would be required to make it work? Given my (the Uk) government's experiences with technological projects, I'm seriously not worried.
We've also had stupid laws for a long time. I don't know if it still is one, but there was a law in the UK that said that you could shoot a man from the walls of York, I think it was, as long as he was Welsh. But you know what? We had an attack of common sense and got rid of it.
And yes, there will be trials and freedom and democracy, because there are still people out there that give a damn, and are willing to swim against the tide.
And you know what? Occaisionally, it works.
Stop being such a pessimist.
Re:Yes I Do Want (Score:2, Insightful)
Am I reading you wrong? Maybe I'm not remembering the character of your prior posts very well. Are you not cynical? Do you ever qualify any proclamations with "well, I'm not entirely sure...", "I think...", or "it could be..."? Or is it really all "damn straight -- people suck is how it is and I'm the person to tell it to ya, ya foolish dreamers"? Maybe it's more performance than measured analysis.
Right on brother! I like the way you think. It is a pattern with most radicals that they are so convinced of their ideas, they never see the duality of the world. You put it in the words very well. I am going to use this logical chain in the next argument.