Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Laser HUD Projected on Retina

michael posted more than 12 years ago | from the hope-it-has-a-screen-saver dept.

Upgrades 325

Ligur writes: "The scoop is at the Seattle P-I: 'This fall, Bothell-based Microvision Inc. plans to give people the same cybernetic experience that once existed only in a screenwriter's imagination. Through a device called Nomad, people will be able to read information from a small, wearable computer that projects an image over their normal vision.'" Looks like they've come a long way in the past three years.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Damn (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188417)

This will only distract CmdrTaco from spelunking JonKatz's anus for a few minutes. Anything better on the horizon?

Re:Damn (-1)

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM (537317) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188574)

Sacrificing your own anus would be a better solution.

Laser HUD Projected on My Nuts (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188419)

fp assholes. eat my feces.

Re:Laser HUD Projected on My Nuts (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188440)

Not quite, you dumb little shit. How does it feel to be raped?

Re:Laser HUD Projected on My Nuts (-1)

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM (537317) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188589)

I was raped by a carrot, then I ate it.

Mirror (0, Funny)

Alan_Thicke (553655) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188422)

Here is a mirror. [yimg.com]

Re:Mirror (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188631)

AHAHAHAAH! Holy cow, that was funny. I spit my drink out all over the desk thanks to that. Ahha! Keep it up!

whoa! just hope that laser isn't hacked (2, Funny)

CProgrammer98 (240351) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188444)

"The device shoots a tiny laser beam that draws patterns onto the retina so that only the wearer sees the images."


Anyone else worried about having a laser beam blasted at their retina?


"Hey Mike, let's go hack Fred's laser while he's out at lunch, we'll crank up the laser's output power..." teeheeheeee what a wheeze.

Re:whoa! just hope that laser isn't hacked (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188473)

Why does this idiotic comment come up EVERY DAMN TIME a story about this is posted?

Get a clue: They're not using a 1 watt laser. Do you worry about shining a flashlight into your eyes because someone might have "hacked the battery" so it puts out the power of a searchlight?

Sheesh.

1 word: (0, Offtopic)

CProgrammer98 (240351) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188488)

HUMOUR

don't be so serious dude, laugh a little.

Re:1 word: (1, Offtopic)

foobar104 (206452) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188545)

HUMOUR

Two words:

NOT FUNNY.

Admittedly, humor of the absurd can be pretty damn funny. But this comment wasn't absurd. It was just dumb. Eye-rollingly, head-shakingly dumb.

Re:1 word: (1)

d_vader (63207) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188610)

Which brings up the entire discussion of humour and humanity and diversity. Just because you don't find it funny, doesn't mean nobody else finds it funny. Or do you subscribe to a universal humour scale, whereby everything is judged?

Re:1 word: (2, Offtopic)

foobar104 (206452) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188666)

I think humor is one of the last things left that our peculiar western society allows us to make purely subjective value judgements about. Things that were once morally unthinkable are now valid lifestyle choices. Prejudice, even if based on experience or education, is unacceptable. Wanna shut down the conversation at a dinner party? Start expressing the opinion that certain things are just absolutely right and others are absolutely wrong.

But funny is always open to interpretation. If it ain't funny, you're free to say so. Loudly, if you want. Won't offend anybody.

So yeah, I guess you could say I subscribe to a universal humor scale whereby everything is judged. It's called my sense of humor, and I consider it absolute.

Nyah.

(HHOS)

Re:1 word: (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188633)

Two words: YOUR MOM hahahahaha

Re:whoa! just hope that laser isn't hacked (5, Funny)

JonWan (456212) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188495)

Yeah the product safty people will make them put a warning label on it.

"DO NOT LOOK DIRECTLY INTO LASER"

Re:whoa! just hope that laser isn't hacked (-1)

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM (537317) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188627)

/. janitors should put a warning label on the front page.

"GO BACK TO WORK, YOU ARE NOT FUNNY"

Re:whoa! just hope that laser isn't hacked (-1, Troll)

Rude Turnip (49495) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188619)

I'd hate to live a life having this image [goatse.cx] burned into my vision forever.

Cant wait till the price comes down (3, Insightful)

gmg (94371) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188450)

It would be interesting to see how this would be integrated with our current set of home devices. Right now it appears the cost is a bit too much for the average geek.

PREMIER COMMENTAIR (FRANCAIS) (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188455)

Netcraft a maintenant confirmé: le *BSD meurt.

Encore une autre bombe estropiante a frappé la communauté cernée de *BSD quand récemment IDC a confirmé que le *BSD explique moins qu'une fraction de 1 pour cent de tous les serveurs. Venez sur les talons de la dernière enquête de Netcraft qui déclare simplement que le *BSD a perdu plus de part de marché, services de ces nouvelles pour renforcer le long de ce que nous avons su tous. *BSD s'effondre dans disarray complet, comme encore exemplifié en échouant complètement pour la dernière fois dans l'essai complet récent de gestion de réseau du système Admin.

Vous n'avez pas besoin d'être un Kreskin pour prévoir les *BSD futurs. L'écriture de main est sur le mur: le *BSD fait face à un futur morne. En fait il n'y aura pas aucun futur du tout pour le *BSD parce que le *BSD meurt. Les choses regardent très mauvaises pour le *BSD. Autant de de nous se rendent déjà compte, le *BSD continue à perdre le part de marché. L'encre rouge coule comme un fleuve de sang. FreeBSD est plus mis en danger d'eux tous, après avoir perdu 93% de ses réalisateurs de noyau.

Se tenons aux faits et regarder les nombres.

Le Chef Theo d'OpenBSD déclare qu'il y a 7000 utilisateurs d'OpenBSD. Combien d'utilisateurs de NetBSD y a-t-il? Voyons. Le nombre d'OpenBSD contre des poteaux de NetBSD sur le USENET est rudement dans le rapport de 5 à 1. Par conséquent il y a environ les utilisateurs 7000/5 = de 1400 de NetBSD. Les poteaux de BSD/OS sur le USENET sont environ la moitié du volume de poteaux de NetBSD. Par conséquent il y a environ 700 utilisateurs de BSDOS. Un article récent a mis FreeBSD à environ 80 pour cent du marché de *BSD. Par conséquent il y a 7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 utilisateurs de FreeBSD. C'est conformé au nombre de poteaux de USENET de FreeBSD.

En raison des ennuis de la crique de noix, les ventes insondables et ainsi de suite, FreeBSD est sorti des affaires et a été succédé par BSDI qui vendent un autre OS préoccupé. Maintenant BSDI est également mort, son cadavre retourné à encore une autre maison de charnel.

Tous les aperçus principaux prouvent que le *BSD a solidement diminué dans le *BSD de part de marché est très en difficulté et ses perspectives à long terme de survie sont très faibles. Si le *BSD doit survivre du tout il sera parmi des amateurs d'amateur d'cOs. *BSD continue à se délabrer. Rien sous peu d'un miracle n'a pu le sauver en ce moment à temps. Pour tous les buts pratiques, le *BSD est mort.

Le *BSD meurt.

Re:PREMIER COMMENTAIR (FRANCAIS) (-1)

MMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM (537317) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188647)

France surrender

Sounds Like... (1)

AO (62151) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188456)

Something I would really want pointing at my eye! I'm sure it's safe, but can you imagine the marketing problems?

Transparent? Not really (5, Insightful)

Software (179033) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188459)

The display is a red, transparent computer screen, but, in fact, is no screen at all. The device shoots a tiny laser beam that draws patterns onto the retina so that only the wearer sees the images.
OK, fine, but how come I can barely see the guy's right eye in the picture [nwsource.com] ? There's not much point in a transparent screen if the surrounding equipment is not tranparent. Maybe if it was off-axis it would be more useful.

Still, this does sound like promising technology.

Re:Transparent? Not really (2, Interesting)

Mr Windows (91218) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188518)

Microvision [mvis.com] (the company responsible) also have a "Nomad [mvis.com] ", which has more hardware, but less of it's in the way of your eye. That seems more practical, in that you can see more, but the equipment is more bulky.

Re:Transparent? Not really (0)

enrayged (67136) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188540)

what the guy in the picture is wearing is a prototype. More than likely once it hits the market it will be much less intrusive, much less noticable. I would hate to be wearins something blatantly obvious and be mugged for my headset :)

Re:Transparent? Not really (2)

tswinzig (210999) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188588)

OK, fine, but how come I can barely see the guy's right eye in the picture [nwsource.com]? There's not much point in a transparent screen if the surrounding equipment is not tranparent.

Hold two fingers in front of one of your eyes. You can "see through them" right? Same principle with this device, which btw, is a prototype.

I tried it at ACM1... (5, Insightful)

gtada (191158) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188462)

The problem that I have with their technology is that it seems to have a very narrow range of focus. Unless you're pretty still, it's out of focus. Unless there is some way to really anchor this unit to your head (like maybe some surgical implants!), I'm not really interested.

Re:I tried it at ACM1... (1)

egerlach (193811) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188557)

They've really got some problems with their design. My boss is a vision guy, and he's all into these toys. He says that they're trying to make a version where there is a tracking beam which moves the projector depending on where you're looking to keep it pointing at the same place on the retina. I find that laughable. Apparantly there are much better ways of doing the same thing... don't ask me though, I'm just the lowly code monkey :)

risks (4, Funny)

ethereal (13958) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188466)

Sure, it's all fun and games until airport security starts ripping them off of people at the gates. Then we'll have starry-eyed cyborgs blundering into baggage racks and falling down all over the place :)

(yes, I feel sorry for the guy who got worked over by customs, but I also find the idea of confused cyborgs running into things very funny. So sue me.)

Re:risks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188507)

Almost as hard to market as a device that propels people at high speeds with a power device that has internal explosions about a hundred times a second.

Oh wait, if we find it useful, to heck with the dangers.

Re:risks (2)

quantaman (517394) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188685)

But on that point Steve Mann now has an excuse to get one heck of a new toy!!

corrective lenses? (3, Insightful)

Em Emalb (452530) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188472)

How about my contact lenses? Will they get messed up by this?

Nothing like a piece of melting plastic in your eye to wake you up. I highly recommend it.

It's a scanning laser (1)

TrollMan 5000 (454685) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188524)

A single-pixel laser beam moves so fast across the eye that the light creates lingering images which become as much a part of one's vision as scenery in the background.

Since it moves quickly, the beam does not stay in one place long enough to burn a hole in any one particular area.

Re:It's a scanning laser (1)

baxissimo (135512) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188686)

That is, until it stops because of a hardware failure, and a nice little hole is burned into your fovea.

Re:corrective lenses? (1)

Mr Windows (91218) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188663)

I hope not: if it's powerful enough to melt contacts, it's powerful enough to do serious damage to your eyes!

Please do not look... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188479)

...into the laser with your remaining eye.

Burn in (5, Funny)

cr@ckwhore (165454) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188480)

I hope this HUD doesn't have the same problem as old monocrhome monitors with burn-in. That would suck a lot.

Re:Burn in (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188625)

Just use a screen-saver.

Re:Burn in (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188659)

Your basic sucks.

10:PRINT "your mom"
20:GOTO 10

How many times... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188487)

...are we going to see this story?

Burn-In (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188490)


I might worry about images being burned into my vision permanently. It would suck to have to see,



GAME OVER

Please Insert 25 cents

all day long.

Think of the possibilities (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188491)

Now you don't have to worry that others will see you surfing for pr0n, oh the possibilities...

Re:Think of the possibilities (1)

McD!ck (444861) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188622)

I was just thinking, "Hmm, I know some one is going to put something up about pr0n!" :) Hey, if WAP pr0n is profitable. . .

I can't wait till they integrate a RGB unit that can display any color and create a full color image. Then I can beam a movie directly into my brain.

McD

from the picture... (1)

checkitout (546879) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188494)

It doesnt look like you can see through it. I mean, it covers your entire eye. So while it's cool, you wont be walking around like the terminator any time soon.

Very Cool, but..... (1)

Egonis (155154) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188496)

This is a really cool advane, but I have just a few concerns:

- Field of view will be limited to the Centre of the Retina, mostly for reading purposes... you can't exactly look over to the far-right of your retina...
- Some people have weak/damaged retina's, is a laser safe? (I'm not assuming a med laser here...)
- For people with severe Myopic conditions and the like, how clear will the image be after going through corrective lenses?

I'd love to try this thing!

Re:Very Cool, but..... (1)

bmongar (230600) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188593)

Field of view will be limited to the Centre of the Retina, mostly for reading purposes... you can't exactly look over to the far-right of your retina...

It would use your whole field of view, no need to look, it can paint across the entire retina.

For people with severe Myopic conditions and the like, how clear will the image be after going through corrective lenses?

If it were anything like the equipment at the eye doctors, it could tell how well it was focused on your retina and change the pattern to account for the curvature of your lense.

Another Nomad? (1)

AndrewCox (180128) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188497)

Man, how many devices are going to be called Nomad in the near future? It used to be my Quake name and now everyone uses it =)

- Nomad (portable Genesis)
- Nomad Jukebox (mp3 player)
- Nomad (laser HUD)

Any others?

Re:Another Nomad? (2)

sulli (195030) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188535)

Way back in the day, the Bell System introduced one of the very first cordless phones under the name NOMAD. I remember seeing these at Bell Phone Center stores before the AT&T breakup in 1984. So yes, the name has been used for all sorts of things.

The obvious one (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188592)

55-57 Chevy 2 door wagons. Very cool.

Re:Another Nomad? (1)

nucal (561664) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188623)

Remember ST-TOS: The Changeling [treasure-troves.com]

Kirk? Wait a minute, you aren't Roykirk? Too much IMPERFECTION

Nomad .... wait .... ZZZZZap

Isn't this like... (1)

niftyeric (467236) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188499)

the thing Gene Starwind uses while fighting in the Outlaw Star? ;) You'd always see a little red laser flash right into his eye.

I could see this being used the same way Gene used it, except maybe the Air Force would take advantage of it.

Portable HUD, I like it.

Better watch out boarding planes! (1)

bahtama (252146) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188502)

Oh good, now I too can become dizzy, disoriented and a general mess if I lose the display or have it taken away at the airport. I especially will have to watch out for those "pile of fire extinguishers" that are usually found in airports. :)

For those of you who missed, I am of course referring to this guy.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/14/technology/circu its/14MANN.html [nytimes.com]

Hopefully, you can also make this shoot out the other way, ala Locutus of the Borg ;)

I live in a very industrial town... (3, Troll)

Ali Jenab (565034) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188503)

And my eye doctor had a lot to say about this new development:
Are they crazy???
He went on to explain that everybody knows how sensitive human eyes are, until some new technology comes out that is "so cool" that everybody wants to try it. Witness retinal scanning: retina scanners have been known to damage sensitive (read: decaying 80-year-old) eyes and result in a temporary loss or blurriness of vision. He also explained that there are many subtle ways that these sorts of devices can break that would cause unspeakable damage to one's eyes. "Hiccups" in power supplies, jarring, and even everyday resistor failure could have dire consequences. My eye doctor believes that anything that interacts closely with a user's eyes should be classified as medical equipment and held to the same high, fault-tolerant standards as dialysis machines, heary defiberators, and breathing tents. And, as somebody concerned about the bodily integrity concerns [slashdot.org] involving human-computer integration, I just have to agree with him.

/ali

Re:I live in a very industrial town... (1)

niftyeric (467236) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188538)

We arn't concerned with the well being of our eyes, we just want to look cool!

Let us just hope that everyone else doesn't go blind or it'll all be for nothing! :)

Re:I live in a very industrial town... (2)

Muad'Dave (255648) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188543)


He went on to explain that everybody knows how sensitive human eyes are...

Except my opthamologist - the brightest light I've ever seen was at his office. First he dilated my pupils, then he shined a bazillion watt light into my eyes. Jeez! I saw blue blobs for a week after that!

Troll?? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188555)

This guy is concerned about people burning their eyes out. Why the hell was he modded "Troll"?

Re:I live in a very industrial town... (2, Interesting)

Egonis (155154) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188566)

Although there is only one beam scanning the retina to produce an image, I personally have reason to be wary... as cool as it sounds.

I have had 4 eye surgeries, and don't want to mess anything up more than it already is.

Extreme caution and care should definitely be taken in producing/maintaining these things. You don't want to lose your vision..

Re:I live in a very industrial town... (4, Insightful)

Fixer (35500) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188692)

Generally I agree with the notion of classifying such tech as a medical device, but I would point out that there HAS to be some safe wattage level for a laser, even if that wattage is lower than the amount of ambient light reaching your eyes on a sunny day. So, as long as the laser is at or below this level, what's the big deal?

Also, a diode laser of sufficently low power would be self-limiting in the case of regulator failure.. they tend to blow if their currents go even slightly beyond their ratings. So, take a page from the nuclear weapons designers: Build such systems with a 'weakest link' mentality.. if any portion of the circuit dies, use components of such low quality that every other one in the chain bites it as well.

It's painful to lose a five thousand dollar device like that, but it's better than going blind, no?

Mirror (-1)

CmderTaco (533794) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188508)

Here is a mirror. [yimg.com]

Re:Mirror (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188590)

shut the fuck up, it's old now

It's Not Done Yet (2, Interesting)

stoolpigeon (454276) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188513)

I think the important thing to remember is that they are shooting for something really usable in 5 years.

I would think this a bit optimistic if it weren't for how rapidly they have gotten this far.

All the posts about shortcomings miss the point. They know about those shortcoming but they may have many of them fixed in a much shorter timespan than anyone would have imagined even a few years ago.

The potential is astounding.

.

Re:It's Not Done Yet (2)

technomancerX (86975) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188604)

And they've actually been working on this tech since like 1992 or so... They put out a press release roughly every six to twelve months, and never deliver a product.

Microvision (1)

nexusone (470558) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188514)

What a copy protection scheme, beam the movies right into the eye.
Soon we can have individual viewing licensees, you put this on to watch a movie and get this message "You are not licensed to watch this movie!"
I bet Disney is already lined up to use it!!!

Oh, wrong Micro-vision, god I hope I did not give them any ideas!

"Some say the end is near, some say we will see Armageddon soon!
I certainly hope so, I could use a vacation from this stupid shit!"
Tool enema

Microvision (2, Funny)

sulli (195030) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188515)

Wouldn't that mean your vision fades in and out if you watch a DVD? No thanks.

Entertainment Value (4, Funny)

pizen (178182) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188516)

Combine this with a wearable computer to project the naked bodies of porn stars over people we see every day. Now, instead of undressing the girl in marketing with my eyes I can undress her with my cyborg-eye.

here's the big question... (1)

motardo (74082) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188521)

does it play MP3's? :) and is it or is it not DMCA Compliant?

-motardo

Slashtard bingo! (1, Flamebait)

grytpype (53367) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188713)

Totally non-sequitur reference to DMCA! Yay!

red porn??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188525)

and you can watch it when uo're in that dull meeting and nobody can tell

Good news, bad news (1, Redundant)

ka9dgx (72702) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188528)

This sounds like great news, unless you travel. Then you'll be forced to deal with the airport Nazi's [kuro5hin.org] , and they'll kill all your toys.

--Mike--
The future is being suppressed.

When will they learn??? (1, Offtopic)

Mr. Neutron (3115) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188533)

...first patented by researchers at the University of Washington's Human Interface Technology Lab [...] Tom Furness, founder of the UW's Human Interface Technology Lab.

UW is the University of Wisconsin, not Washington. Just because you happen to register uw.edu first, does not make it right.

UW == University of Washington (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188690)

Hush up. Everyone knows the UW (aka, UDub) == The University of Washington.

Haven't I seen this somewhere in Science fiction? (2)

Spudley (171066) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188534)

This sounds a lot like several science fiction shows/movies. Isn't this how the Total Recall device worked? and I'm sure there were others.

Seems like every time I think an idea on a TV show is good, someone goes and invents it for real... I'm starting to think the only sci-fi ideas that I won't see in my lifetime are the ones that are actuall physically impossible.

Can't someone think of a creative name? (1)

nob (244898) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188548)

One can only own so [chevynomadclub.com] many [nomadworld.com] nomads [geocities.com] .

(Yes, I do have all of these)

What year? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188648)

I always wanted a '55.

Re:What year? (1)

nob (244898) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188710)

It's a '57. It's in pretty good condition, just needs a new paintjob mostly.

Just Imagine the uses of it... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188551)

let's see, off the top of my head I can think of:
- connect to PDA for scheduling/email/etc
- navigational maps in a car (no need to take your eyes off the road
- HUD's in aircraft
- determining the slope of the green when putting
- EXTREMELY immersive FPS (when the technology advances a bit
- hook to camera to get a 2 color display without risking your neck (military/swat/etc)

But probably the most important use...Making your friends jealous over your new toy :)

Zro

X-Ray Specs (1)

CommieLib (468883) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188554)

I've waited 20 years for these...

Retinal damage (3, Interesting)

BWJones (18351) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188558)

I would be interested to see if they have performed any studies (short term/long term) on the possibility of retinal damage due to projecting lasers directly on the retina. Anyone?

There's lots of stuff that folks are doing to their eyes these days that has no long term data on. For example, Viagra (yes, that Viagra) works because it is a phosphodiesterase inhibitor. We need phosphodiesterase for normal pigment turnover in the photoreceptors of the eyes and lots of evidence indicates photoreceptor loss in various models of phosphodiesterase genetic knock outs. Additionally, if you inhibit the phosphodiesterase of photoreceptors even short term, it leads to the build up of cyclic-GMP which results in increased Na+ permeability and continued deploarization of the photoreceptor membrane potential. The end result is that the photoreceptor no longer responds to light.

I wonder if folks are trading impotency for blindness. By projecting lasers on retinas are we trading more information for blindness?

On the other hand, projecting laser images onto the retina could certainly benefit those that suffer from various forms of vision loss. Perhaps by mapping out where folks have lost vision in their retinas, it may be possible to project the outside world onto the working portions of retina or magnify certain things onto retinas as well.

Re:Retinal damage (2, Insightful)

Moofie (22272) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188638)

A photon's a photon, right? If it's too powerful, it's gonna burn stuff. If it's not, it won't. What's special about laser light that causes your concern?

Re:Retinal damage (2)

BWJones (18351) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188709)

A photon's a photon, right? If it's too powerful, it's gonna burn stuff. If it's not, it won't. What's special about laser light that causes your concern?

Lasers are coherent highly focused photons. Any photons projecting on small areas of the retina result in a greatly increased power density and an increase in the probability or chance of damage to the retina.

Re:Retinal damage (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188672)

Thanks for posting an informed, INSIGHTFUL comment about this technology - no mean feat here on Slashdot. I'm a neuroscience grad student - and I love it when interesting science stories make it here on Slashdot - but I HATE the inevitable idiotic posting that follows, already we have many posts with the same unthinking, knee-jerk responses:

--Whoa! Hope this won't fry my eyes!
--Hope someone doesn't "hack" this thing..;

and so forth. Just because something is a laser doesn't mean it will shoot evil death rays into our eyes! Again, it's the crowd of "Boy! I can hack Perl/C/C++, that MUST mean I'm smart about non-computer science topics too!" that ruins any discussion here, by flooding the postings with crap - even the JOKE posts are repeated! Literally, EVERY retinal projection story here gets the same 100+ retinal barbecuing comments!

Informed comments like yours give me some small measure of hope that there can be an interesting discussion about the development and effects of this research, but I'm too much of a pessimist to really believe that.

With regards to the topic at hand - I don't see this as being great for EVERYONE - ie an elderly person with bad vision and sensitive retinas probably wouldn't want to wear this for a long time, but I see little long-term damage for normal eyes. I for one would love to try this out in a second! More tests should be done, and knowing the people that do this kind of reseach, before any real approval or public use of this tech, such studies will have to be done.

Sincerely,
Kevin Christie
Neuroscience Program
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
crispiewm@hotmail.com

Re:Retinal damage (1, Funny)

stubear (130454) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188681)

So, I guess this means you really can go blind masturbating.

Transparent? (3, Interesting)

dimer0 (461593) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188560)

Uh, I'd rather have depth perception than my stock quotes superimposed on my field of vision.. That damn thing covers that guys entire right eye!!!

Need more (4, Funny)

pizen (178182) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188562)

This needs to be able to identify what I'm looking at so that I can get more information on the subject. Things like "That tree is a Larch" or "That guy is the perfect size for kicking his ass and taking his clothes".

Re:Need more (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3188585)

"This needs to be able to identify what I'm looking at so that I can get more information on the subject. Things like "That tree is a Larch" or "That guy is the perfect size for kicking his ass and taking his clothes"."

Sure, except the unwahsed masses would be kicking your ass for looking like a dork.

combine this with a fast cpu and a camera (4, Interesting)

Sabalon (1684) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188569)

Every person walking down the street gets rendered to your eyes as Ali Larter.

Don't like the color or your car - write a mod so you see it as you like.

Change fonts on signs/books/etc... as you wish with OCR.

Still a ways to go... (3, Informative)

chrism2k (31528) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188571)


An interesting technology. Long-term it looks like it has a lot of potential. But for the time being, it looks like MicroOptical (http://www.microopticalcorp.com/) is a better choice for wearables. They're less obtrusive and they can already do color. And, while they're still not cheap, they are cheaper.

I definitely want to see power-consumption and resolution specs for Nomad, though!

Anybody else bothered by the fact that the article kept describing this as a holographic display?

-chrism

Re:Still a ways to go... (3, Informative)

Bullschmidt (69408) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188682)

The significance of this is not the size, price or color/mono. Its HOW it is done. This particular one shoots the image straight to the retina, versus hanging an LCD in front of the eye, which seems to be how microoptical is doing it (their website seemed a touch sparse on technical info). I believe microvision does sell the lcd style display at a much cheaper price, in color and to very high resolutions (800x600?).

All this is more or less from memory, so I could be wrong!

Mis-read that :-) (1)

eggz128 (447435) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188586)

I thought it said 'Macrovision' rather than 'Microvision' and wondered how your vision constantly changing brightness could be considered a good thing :)

Re:Mis-read that :-) (1)

user32.ExitWindowsEx (250475) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188680)

Macrovision????
Nooooooooo!!!!
Copy-protected eyes! The MPAA has gone too far. I don't want to pay to have to descramble my own vision.

Wouldn't it need to adjust to ambient light.. (1)

RandomInAction (566930) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188608)

..conditions? The effect in bright sunlight would be quite different to that of very low light conditions. Indeed in very low light conditions the eyes sensitivity may be significantly reduced. Even though red light preserves night vision best.

The only advantage this has over other HUDs, insofar as I can tell, is low power consumption.


Wake me up when it has red, green and blues lasers and cost $200.

Help for the blind (3, Interesting)

Kredal (566494) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188629)

The article said that people who are legally blind (most likely because their eyes don't focus correctly) can see the laser image pasted on their retinas.

Attach this device to a head-mounted camera (even a cheap web-cam would work) and you could pretty much restore vision, much like hearing aids work. I would love to see these things helping the average person, as well as professionals who need the extra edge (doctors, astronauts, etc).

sihh (1)

VAXGeek (3443) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188649)

I've recently noticed a trend: /. doesn't really post any interesting news stories anymore. I don't know if this is due to recent events being slowish or whatever, but the quality of the site has been ESPECIALLY bad. I know /. jumped the shark a long time ago, but on the ski slope of quality, we're at some sort of "interest canyon" where /. sucks more than ever. Has anyone else noticed /.'s suckage over the past two weeks?

That's News? (2)

epsalon (518482) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188654)

It's been in Serious Sam [croteam.com] several years ago?

What do you mean Serious Sam is not real life? They're not using UNREAL engine!

Rename (1)

rjamestaylor (117847) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188657)

Rename the screen saver Mystify to "Misty-Eye".

I don't know...the thought of direct retinal imaging with a laser makes me feel awkward.

More likely uses for this technology... (1)

OneFix (18661) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188668)

It seems like this technology might be more likely to appear in helmets first, like those used for Motorcycles or Racing. This also seems like a place where this technology would be more useful.

It would also be easier to get these ppl to try the technology. Of course, I'm sure it's obvious that the military would find this technology most useful for soldiers in the field...

Just what we need, another driver distraction! (0)

psychopenguin (228012) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188676)

Not dangerous? HA! You just wait until you see someone driving down the road talking on the cell phone in one hand, holding a cigarette in the other, listening to XM-radio, reading the newspaper sitting on the steering wheel and playing Q3 on their PDA being projected onto their retina!

Seriously though, this is just going to become another one of those things that you cuss at people for trying to do while they drive.

Hiro Protagonist (3, Interesting)

Wire Tap (61370) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188678)

This device reminds me of the display Hiro uses in Neal Stephemson's "Snow Crash." No monitor, per se, but instead, a laser paints his eye with the image of the metaverse. Same idea, it seems. I like it (my 21 inch monitors are so bulky!), but I agree with an earlier post that these devices should be held under the same kind of scrutiny that medical eqipment is. The innovation is great (and it's about time!) but it _must_ be safe.

Macrovision also has a full color model... (2, Interesting)

the_consumer (547060) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188694)

...called the Spectrum [microvision.com] . 24 bit svga 800*600, configurable as a stereoscopic binocular display. Sounds like quake through this thing would be incredible.

YARPS (0, Flamebait)

jargoone (166102) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188699)

Yet Another Retinal Projection Story...

Nothin but vapor to see here, folks.

Old News (1)

Laser_47 (234412) | more than 12 years ago | (#3188702)

This [slashdot.org] has the same article in it posted in June.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?