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!

Still More Bionic Eyes

michael posted more than 12 years ago | from the bionic-eyes-are-smiling dept.

Science 161

jeno writes "An Australian-invented 'bionic eye' device is about to begin human trials. The device consists of a silicon chip inserted into the eye, which is designed to act like a retina -- receiving images captured by a pair of glasses worn by the user."

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

Wow that's.... (-1, Offtopic)

dirkdidit (550955) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138584)

pretty cool.. This could have great benefits to people that have trouble seeing. Oh by the way, First post!

Re:Wow that's.... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138598)

if it weren't for this two post a day crap, I'd own your post. Well, I'll claim it any way. How's that?

luv,

handybundler

FP 2D AC! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138871)

the FP is yours, AC. FP's by karma whores are not valid entries for first posts. Congratulations!

I can detect karma whores on sight. They have Usernames.

fp (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138589)

two in a day

luv,

handybundler

We can fix him! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138593)

nanananannanananana

Lameness, lameness, the musical fruit.

third (world) post? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138596)

Slow Down Cowboy! Slashdot requires you to wait 20 seconds between hitting 'reply' and submitting a comment. It's been 39 seconds since you hit 'reply'!

third (world) post? New World Man! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138928)

He's a rebel and a runner
He's a signal turning green
He's a restless young romantic
Wants to run the big machine

He's got a problem with his poisons
But you know he'll find a cure
He's cleaning up his systems
To keep his nature pure

Learning to match the beat of the Old World Man
Learning to catch the heat of the Third World Man

He's got to make his own mistakes
And learn to mend the mess he makes
He's old enough to know what's right
But young enough not to choose it
He's noble enough to win the world
But weak enough to lose it
He's a New World Man...

He's a radio receiver
Tuned to factories and farms
He's a writer and arranger
And a young boy bearing arms

He's got a problem with his power
With weapons on patrol
He's got to walk a fine line
And keep his self-control

Trying to save the day for the Old World Man
Trying to pave the way for the Third World Man

He's not concerned with yesterday
He knows constant change is here today
He's noble enough to know what's right
But weak enough not to choose it
He's wise enough to win the world
But fool enough to lose it
He's a New World Man...

Glasses? (2, Funny)

Kwikymart (90332) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138597)

When can I get a Geordie LaForge Visor so I can tell when people are lying by their body temperature?

Australian invention... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138607)

...is an oxymoron.

nice idea and ultimate spyware (1, Troll)

stuuf (587464) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138608)

just wait until the FBI finds out how to pick up the signals going from the glasses to the eye.

Re:nice idea and ultimate spyware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138617)

Or MPAA invents some CRM (Cybernetic Rights Management) to control the images picked up by the camera and sent to the eye.

Re:nice idea and ultimate spyware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138628)

Yeah. Lord knows there are probably dozens of blind serial killers with new found bionic vision wreaking havoc upon us at this very moment!

No, that would be rather pointless (1)

thelinuxking (574760) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138725)

From the article:
"We broadcast data into the body using radio waves," he explained. "It's like a radio station that only has a range of 25 millimetres."

This means that in order to pick up the signals, they would have to use some device that picks up signal within 25 millimetres of the glasses. This means that they have two choices

1.Go to a lot of trouble to get much less than a centimeter from the person and get a 10x10 b&w image

OR

2.Get sorta near person, and just look with own eyes and get infinite resolution, full color image that can be instantly viewed.

Re:No, that would be rather pointless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138751)

25mm isn't "a lot less than a centimetre, in fact, its 2.5cm.
So glasses with a range of 25mm would transmit with a radius of 25mm.

Re:No, that would be rather pointless (1)

thelinuxking (574760) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138826)

Still, I think the second way for the FBI to see what the guy is seeing would be the better choice ;)

Re:No, that would be rather pointless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4139061)

The problem is a bit more complicated than that, I have to say. Data bieng transmitted over a PCs motherboard can be intercepted given the right (and very expensive) hardware. The FBI is just one of the agencies that can potentially have access to Echelon hardware. Of course, that little transmitter isn't going to transmit anything that can be intercepted from a very far distance. I certianly wouldn't rule out the possibility of intercepting the signal from, say, across an average street, with perfect line of sight.

Of course, if you can receive the image from the glasses, you can almost certianly see the person as well.

Given the ammount of money and resources the FBI, CIA and NSA have, it becomes an acedemic issue: the question changes from "Is it possible?" to "Why not try?", and it will probably be accompolished for the sheer reason "Because they can."

Either way, the prospect of having ones' own vision Van Eck phreaked is unnerving at best.

Re:nice idea and ultimate spyware (1)

NoProblem (35563) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138809)

Somewhere there must be a serious shortage of tin hats.

Re:nice idea and ultimate spyware (2)

cscx (541332) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138833)

Oh, enough with the anti-Government conspiracy theories already! When will you all understand that if you have nothing to hide that there is no reason to be paranoid like this. What are you a terrorist or something?

Re:nice idea and ultimate spyware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4139191)

Yes everyone who cares about thier constitutional rights and enviroment, or simply supports the other party must be a terrorist

Re:nice idea and ultimate spyware (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4139195)

One need only look into the history of germay to find out why this type of "paranoya is quite justified". I'm sorry your ignorance prevents you from seeing that. Maybe they should start working on a version that helps people who only see the world through rose colored glasses.

Re:nice idea and ultimate spyware (2)

cscx (541332) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139244)

I'm sorry but this isn't 1940's Nazi Germany -- this is America 2002, we're not a police state, no matter how much you may think this to be the case.

Bionic Eye (0, Offtopic)

locarecords.com (601843) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138612)

Seems a bit useless to me. Much cooler if it projected onto the glasses so that you could get a cool 3-d image to supplement our normal vision. Who would need television or monitors then?

Also combined with the cool no-hands eye typing (see http://www.economist.com) that would be a wicked HCI system.

LOCA [locarecords.com]

Re:Bionic Eye (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138630)

Seems a bit useless to me. Much cooler if [..] supplement our normal vision.

Uhh.. the whole point is to restore vision to those who've lost it, not provide "cool 3D" images to those who still have it.

Re:Bionic Eye (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138682)

Fuck you dillweed. The point may be to provide for the lacking, but eventually the technology will progress to such a level that everyone will want to have it. This is what is driving the development. Don't be a naive fuckwit, man. Such heartwarming pursuits as unblinding the blind or dedeafing the deaf are just covers so that the companies can develop technology for people like me.

Re:Bionic Eye (1)

dextr0us (565556) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138810)

yeah..... damn those blind people for being blind. They forget that instead of these people developing technology for them, they could be using their talents for me to make more 1337 gaming consoles. fucking people and their blindness to everything not directly related to them (intentional use of the word)

Re:Bionic Eye (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138763)

Are you daft? How is this useless? It can help people SEE!

radio waves? (3, Interesting)

Dr. Awktagon (233360) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138613)

Well, I hope that radio signal is encrypted or keyed to the individual.. what if two of these folks stand right next to each other?? What if they walk near a radio transmitter, do their eyes go haywire??

Also, how do they know that animal trials were successful??

Re:radio waves? (2, Informative)

Frank of Earth (126705) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138643)

From the article: Tests in animals have been successful, and the team would now like to test the device in a small group of about five people.

Re:radio waves? (3, Informative)

bhsx (458600) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138827)

The question was how do we know the animal tests were successful; not whether or not they were. For example, was an other-wise blind dog able to cross a street or handle a maze without 'feeling' his way through, bumping into walls?

Re:radio waves? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138701)

Also, how do they know that animal trials were successful??

I saw on TV about the first eye implants.. they considered the animal trails "successful" when everything looked like they expected (ie. the eye didn't get infected, or reject the chip, or whatever). They didn't know whether it was actually working at that point.

Re:radio waves? (2)

jcsehak (559709) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138797)

what if two of these folks stand right next to each other??

The article says the range is about 25 millimeters. So they would have to be french kissing with their eyeballs to create this kind of problem. Sounds like a non-issue for all but the extremely kinky.

Re:radio waves? (2)

Alien Being (18488) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138955)

What if they look into each other's eyes? Will they undergo a personality exchange like Bugs Bunny and Elmer Fudd?

What Animal Trials? (0, Offtopic)

rapidweather (567364) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138963)

Also, how do they know that animal trials were successful??
let's see (no pun intended): blind dogs kinda bump into stuff as they move about the yard. If they see squirrels in the nearby trees, you'll quickly know it by the barking and chasing. Squirrels down on the ground: I had a dog that would plot the path the squirrel would take to the nearest tree, and head right to that spot, and presto, he gets there just as the squirrel does (Then the fun begins). Has to see to do all that. With bionic eyes, same results in the dog vs squirrel tests. Now onto Cats: My cat chases another cat out of the yard. He's quite a distance away. I open the door, and call "Kitty-Cat!" and he turns to look at me and runs right up to me pronto. (Big cats, if worked with a bit, almost act like dogs) If he couldn't see, he would need further verbal guidance to reach my location. Again, with bionic eyes, same results in the calling the cat routine.

Re:radio waves? (2, Informative)

Scaebor (587064) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139181)

Also, how do they know that animal trials were successful??
judging by the ultra-low resolution provided by these "eyes," the tests with animals probably consisted of something akin to providing a high-contrast, moving image (for instance a black square moving around a white field) and seeing if the animals responded to it(perhaps by moving their heads to follow the object's movement).

Even though its 10X10 (1)

thelinuxking (574760) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138619)

The example picture shown in the article is barely recognizable. If I hadn't been shown the source image, I would NEVER been able to figure out what the output image was supposed to be...

Oh well, its sorta like playing Atari on a B&W TV, I guess...

Re:Even though its 10X10 (1)

shird (566377) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138645)

Actually, I didn't think it was too bad. Its probably a bit easier to recognise when it is moving. ie the pixels will pick up and represent different real world points, and the brain may be able to 'piece' together the parts. It is probably enough to recognise the difference between a person or a pole, and to be able to avoid it when walking down the street. Certainly not a complete replacement for vision, but its better than nothing and can only get better with time.

Re:Even though its 10X10 (2)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138741)

The problem is that they used a close up of face to pixelate. There so much detail and so much psychological baggage associated with faces that is pretty poor example. I would think more distant objects would be easier to distinguish especially with the proper video processing.

These are not really replacements for the eye, just aides like a walking stick or a seeing eye-dog. Even at 100x100 the patient would still be legally blind and have no real peripheral vision.

Re:Even though its 10X10 (5, Insightful)

OzRoy (602691) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138789)

This would still be a huge improvement over total blindness.

You also have to remember that the brain is extremely flexable and it will be able to learn to recognise shapes even at this low resolution. You would learn to cope very well. You just wouldn't be able to read probably.

You are used to seeing things at a normal human resolution. Imagine you are a hawk with the ability to see a mouse 100 meters below you. You are then shown human eyesite. You wouldn't be able to recognise anything either. But you would adapt.

Bionic eye -- no, "Brown Eye" -- yes !! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138623)

'Twas the night before Goatse, when all through the house
Not a penis was stirring, not even with mouth;
The Giver was hung by the chimney with care,
In hopes that St. Goatse soon would be there;

The children were nestled all snug in their beds,
While visions of anal sex danced in their heads;
And Katz in his 'kerchief, and I in my cap,
Had just settled down for a fuck in the sack.

When up in my anus there arose such a clatter,
I sprang from the bed to see Katz start to splatter.
Away to the bathroom I flew like a flash,
Tore open my anus and looked at the gash.

The moon in the glass had a vibrant red glow
Gave the lustre of sunset to my nutsack below,
When, what to my wondering eyes should appear,
But a miniature sleigh, and eight tiny reindeer!

With a little old driver, so lively and quickse,
I knew in a moment it must be St. Goatse.
More rapid than eagles his coursers they came,
And he whistled, and shouted, and called them by name;

"Now, TACO! now, JAMIE! now, MICHEAL and TIMMY!
On, CHRISD! on HEMOS! on, PUDGEY and CLIFFY!
To the top of the ass! fronts to the the wall!
Now pound away! pound away! pound away all!"

As faggots that before the wild hurricane fly,
When they meet with a hetero, mount the next guy,
So up to the house-top the coursers they flew,
With the sleigh full of sex-toys, and Goatse pics too.

And then, in a twinkling, I heard on the roof
The moaning and pawing of each little poof.
As I drew in my ass, and was turning around,
Down the chimney St. Goatse came with a bound.

He was dressed as a furry, from his head to his feet,
And his clothes were all tarnished with urine and shit;
A bundle of sex-toys he had flung on his back,
And he looked like a hooker just flapping his sack.

His eyes -- how they twinkled! his dimples how merry!
His ass cheeks like roses, his cock like a cherry!
His cute little mouth was drawn up like a bow,
And the beard of his scrotum as white as the snow;

The stump of a blunt he held tight in his teeth,
And the smoke it encircled his head like a wreath;
He had a broad face and was a bit smelly,
He shook, when he wanked like a bowlful of jelly.

He was chubby and plump, a right jolly old elf,
And I laughed when I saw him beat off himself;
A wink of his eye and a twist of his head,
Soon gave me to know I had nothing to dread;

He spoke not a word, but went straight to his work,
And filled all the stockings with smelly big turds,
He layed a big log right under my nose,
And giving a nod, up the chimney he rose;

He sprang to his sleigh, to his team gave a whistle,
And away they all flew like a fucking great missile.
But I heard him exclaim, ere he drove out of sight,
"HAPPY GOATSE TO ALL, AND TO ALL A GOOD-NIGHT!"

hehe, this is rather impressive (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138764)

sure it is offtopic and offensive to many a hypocrit, but it is funny nonetheless.

Worse than pop-ups (3, Funny)

Longinus (601448) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138634)

Just imagine if your bionic eyes get hacked and you spend 24/7 looking a banner ad burned into your silicon retina.

Re:Worse than pop-ups (2)

Greenrider (451799) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138676)

Or imagine your eyes get hacked by a Slashdot troll and you have to look at a certain goat-related image 24/7...

Yeah... (2, Funny)

thelinuxking (574760) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138731)

Think of all the legible text can be viewed in a grayscale 10x10 image. Wouldn't be much use unless the product happened to be one letter long.

Boggles the Mind! (2, Insightful)

Nashville Guy (585073) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138650)

Something like this, if it works, is awesome! To lose your sight, and then regain it? Just like the VISA commercial, priceless!

The use of interfacing devices to intercept neural signals from the brain is incredible! It has already been done (to an extent) aurally. Rush Limbaugh totally lost his hearing, yet benefitted from an implant (cochlear).

As to what it could be, and where it could go? Who cares? If I was on the receiving end, I sure wouldn't be paying too much attention to the options!

I would just be looking at my family and being thankful for the chance to do it!

Re:Boggles the Mind! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138690)

Just like the VISA commercial, priceless!

You fucking idiot, it's Mastercard that does the priceless ads.

Re:Boggles the Mind! (1)

Nashville Guy (585073) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138714)

And your reply, is...Priceless!

Re:Boggles the Mind! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4139033)

You fucking idiot, it's Mastercard that does the priceless ads.

Goes to show you how well those ads are working.

Re:Boggles the Mind! [NITPICK] (1)

The Pi-Guy (529892) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139041)

MasterCard commercial. Ok. Mod me down. :)

--j

Finally get to see your wife... (1)

Scaebor (587064) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139190)

...and never get near her again now that you know what she really looks like.

How many FPS ? (5, Insightful)

Vertigo01 (243919) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138655)

The article fails to mention how many frames per second (if that's the appropriate term) this technology would deliver... even 10x10 pixels would be helpful if delivered at 30 - 40 FPS, but almost worse than useless if delivered at 2 FPS...

Re:How many FPS ? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138752)

good question

Also, I have read in the recent past that the arguments over what exactly was the average framerate of eyesight was offtopic simply because unlike CRT's the eye sees in a very non-symmetric way sorta like a non-horizontal interlacing. The 'frame rate' is both an average of what is sent and another average of what is processed. Considering that the majority of eye site is actually processed as pattern recognition and memory, then it could be argued without knowing for certain that said pattern recognition is both a curse and a blessing. (curse for how it can cause us to see things wrong, as well as it most likely 'slows' down the processing and wavelength range interpretation)

Re:How many FPS ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4139198)

The last figure I heard was ~90rpm to make a fan spin static. When this happens that means it's moving exactly as fast as your instantaious vision.

Re:How many FPS ? (1, Insightful)

Scott Baio (549373) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138957)

NTSC television broadcasts are at 30 fps, whereas most motion pictures are filmed and shown at 16 fps. This is why many videos made from filmed movies actually contain the same content on almost every pair of frames. Broadcasts that were originally shot on video (like, for instance, "Charles in Charge"), contain original content on all 30 frames each second.

It's quite a bargain to buy videos and DVDs of you favorite old TV shows, like "Happy Days," and "Joanie Loves Chachi," considering that you get two episodes per tape, with all those frames of unique content for a little less than you'd pay for a theatrical movie released to video.

T*R*O*L*L (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4139251)

OMG, that wasn't even any good. Not funny. The premise, so factually incorrect as to be obvious even to the most ignorant, isn't even drawing flies to the bones of that horse you're whipping. I spit -- *ptew!* -- on your post!

Re:How many FPS ? (1, Redundant)

anthony_dipierro (543308) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139040)

It probably doesn't work that way at all (as frames). Your eyes certainly don't.

The real question is.. (1, Offtopic)

Frank of Earth (126705) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138656)

how good the pr0n is at 10x10.

Currently the technology is only able to transmit a 10 x 10 pixel image

Re:The real question is.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138905)

The Braille interface (fingers) is better for pr0n.

Other Article Mentioned (4, Informative)

instinctdesign (534196) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138661)

The other bionic eye alluded to in the title is this article from Wired [wired.com] and its accompanying Slashdot post [slashdot.org] . Excellent read if you missed it.

(And no, I don't need the karma, its stuck on... "yahoo, you're not 100% useless 'round here" or something...) :P

Sex for the Ugly (5, Funny)

anthony_dipierro (543308) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138694)

Speech for the Deaf [slashdot.org] , Sight for the Blind [slashdot.org] , now all we need is Sex for the Ugly [kuro5hin.org] and I'll be all set.

Re:Sex for the Ugly (1)

Longinus (601448) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138706)

Gee, I really needed to see that story linked to one more time! Almost every news site I read regulary has posted about that study over the past week or so. Is it really that astounding or interesting? Let it rest, people.

Re:Sex for the Ugly (1)

anthony_dipierro (543308) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138712)

The funny thing is I actually didn't think about linking to that story until after I had written the sentence.

Re:Sex for the Ugly (2, Funny)

thelinuxking (574760) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138839)

Actually "Sight for the Blind" is a step backward in progress from making the goal of "Sex for the Ugly" possible.

Re:Sex for the Ugly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4139175)

One would think if the ugly realized how ugly they were and lowered their standards they might have sex with other ugly people. Thank god this doesn't happen all that often or there would be a whole lot more ugly people in the world.

Re:Sex for the Ugly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138976)

What I want to know is, does it make a cool bleeping noises when used, like the one Steve Austin had.

Re:Sex for the Ugly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4139101)

They're doctors, not miracle workers

If only... (1)

l33t-gu3lph1t3 (567059) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138702)

A blind man could hook those bionic eyes up to one of those Sony Glasstron sunglass-tv units playing some Spice Channel ;-)

Glasses is just v 1.0..... (-1)

cjc84 (543977) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138721)

Next the user will wear contact lens-type equipment in place of the glasses that will transmit the data to the retina implant.

Then it will be surpassed by laser surgery etching the circuitry onto the pupil.

Maybe. :-)

The future of the bionic eye (5, Funny)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138758)

Manufacturers clamor for market dominance in the bionic eye market, and come up with a hodgepodge of several dozen incompatible technologies. The Justice Department demands the ability to remotely observe what people are looking at, and pressures manufacturers to secretly include key escrow technologies in their circuitry. Copyright-holding corporations realize that the junction between the optic nerve and the CCD chip is ripe for targeting, since you can effectively close off the "analog hole" by sticking an agent in there that enforces copyrights on all visual images passing through. They lobby intensively and as a result the government steps in and mandates that within X years all vision should be digital and incorporate some approved form of copy-protection. This is hailed by the corporate press as a "victory for the consumer" because of the expected abundance of pay-per-see content, even though the early adopters get struck blind by the mandated copy protection- making their eyes worthless, although they are still prized by a small minority for their ability to boot up free operating systems.

Manufacturers continue to trip over each other in their efforts to corner the market, and come up with even more incompatible formats. Consumers who purchase the systems find that the left eye from manufacturer X (about to go out of business) and right eye from manufacturer Y (about to go out of business) both want to be in charge of what you're looking at. Getting different components to cooperate is next to impossible. When one eye breaks, you have to get them both replaced because everything is incompatible with everything else and every model is discontinued or obsoleted as soon as it comes out. People start to write scathing reviews about how the industry and Congress both need to get their act together.

Meanwhile, consumers look at this fiasco and rightly conclude that their eyes are working fine, and that there is no reason to throw them out.

Re:The future of the bionic eye (1)

Emexies (470069) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138940)

Have you been reading too much Transmetropolitan again?

Radio waves? (3, Funny)

Kizzle (555439) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138774)

Damn now I have to get a fcc license for my eyes.

Re:Radio waves? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138897)

Nah, you're under 1 watt, so you're legal.

brain tech (2, Interesting)

sstory (538486) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138783)

the real story here is the experience and technology the eye problem will give neurology. Interacting with the eye and vision structures of the brain is the easiest way to get a foothold in neuro-cybernetics, and such problems are widespread enough to provide researchers much study.

Maybe, in the end, giving machines human-quality visual capabiliy will be a result of using machines to return the same to impaired humans.

A problem... (1)

rde (17364) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138785)

Of course, if you're relying on technology for your sight, you run the serious risk of going blind because of the EMP if you're beside a nuclear bomb when it goes off.

Re:A problem... (1)

khold (164649) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138808)

Perhaps, but also, if you are close enough to a nuke, you also have to worry about losing your vision because your are dead too.

Re:A problem... (1)

jimmy_dean (463322) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138818)

lol! An excellent observation. ;)

Re:A problem... (1)

Tarison (600538) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138994)

If you're relying on this technology for your sight, the chances are you're ALREADY blind. It's probably the least of your worries at that point, anyway.

it doesnt seem all that great (1)

3th3rn3t (245106) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138793)

well, call me weird but the image doesnt seem all that great to me. sure, its better than nothing, but its absolutely nothing.
i doubt it that this 10x10 range will be any good. the idea is pretty good thought and with proper R&D it can develop to someting helpful ...

A question (3, Interesting)

brandonsr (550431) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138841)

Ok, this is a serious question so don't mod me down.

Would it be possible, with this new eye, for colorblind people to see color? Or is this still more along the lines of gene therapy.

Re:A question (1)

jkeyes (243984) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138988)

If the technology got super duper duper duper better and you could have full vision with color than yes but don't look for it happening soon.

Re:A question (1)

Scaebor (587064) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139210)

For an adult colorblind his entire life, would the visual cortex even be capable of seeing color or would it be like an adult who has been blind his entire life suddenly being able to see? In the case of the blind person, he would be incapable of seeing well because of the lack of development in the unused portions of the brain that handle sight.

nerve technology. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138842)

From the sounds of the article it seems the technology for transmitting the digital signal to the nervous system works similar to the other Australian invention - the Bionic ear.
I think patentwise, and for large companies etc. the technology will be kept under tight control for ethical reasons. I'm fairly sure the ear people are a private company owned by a university.....?

Remember "$6M Man" (5, Funny)

Kotukunui (410332) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138843)

Just as long as the bionic eye doesn't make that "do-doo-do-doot" funny noise everytime you use it. That would drive me nuts.

My Vision (1)

aashenfe (558026) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138874)

Now What they need is a camera small enough to fit in your Iris. Get rid of that extra radio equipment since the chip can connect directly to the camera. Ad some cool night vision and Infared capabilities, maybe zoom. Then make it comparably priced as laser treatment. Only then I will get surgery for my myopia.

Re:My Vision (1)

messiertom (590151) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139048)

Stop it, now you're making me wish I was blind and had a time machine [slashdot.org] .

hehe (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138886)

I can see... boy is cowboy neal ugly

ALL BOW TO MY BIONIC PENIS (-1)

GhostseTroll (582659) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138890)

now!

Scramjets, Bionic Eyes and Ears, Nicole Kidman... (1)

mtec (572168) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138917)

What's in the freakin' water down under!?

Re:Scramjets, Bionic Eyes and Ears, Nicole Kidman. (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138948)

Heh, I am from down under - I have wondered what they put in the water here many times. You missed out the refugee crisis, supporting 'the war on terror' and then whinging when iraq cancels our wheat exports, the teleportation device using lasers and elle mcpherson.

Oh! Yes Elle! (1)

mtec (572168) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139026)

That wonderful, wonderful water!

Electric Eyes? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138923)

Up here in space
I'm looking down on you.
My lasers trace
Everything you do.

You think you've private lives
Think nothing of the kind.
There is no true escape
I'm watching all the time.

I'm made of metal
My circuits gleam.
I am perpetual
I keep the country clean.

I'm elected electric spy
I protected electric eye.

Always in focus
You can't feel my stare.
I zoom into you
You don't know I'm there.

I take a pride in probing all your secret moves
My tearless retina takes pictures that can prove.

I'm made of metal
My circuits gleam.
I am perpetual
I keep the country clean.

I'm elected electric spy
I protected electric eye

Electric eye, in the sky
Feel my stare, always there
's nothing you can do about it.
Develop and expose
I feed upon your every thought
And so my power grows.
Protected. Detective. Electric eye.

Will the eye have DRM? (1)

mtec (572168) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138938)

Wait'll the RIAA gets a-hold o' this!

Someone gives you a taped copy of Friends and you can't see it...

Seeing the world in pixels... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138949)

Would be very unnerving. If you had vision restored through one of these artificial eyes, and the focus of the mind goes back to the vision (because the modern lifestyle is predominantly visual), would it start to affect your mind after a while like some kind of Matrix effect? Would the person start dreaming in pixels? @_@

Who figured out the interface protocol (1)

Raiford (599622) | more than 12 years ago | (#4138953)

Hey the optic nerve doesn't exactly accept RS-232 or any of the IEEE standards so how did the researchers figure out how and what signals should be provided as input to the optic nerve and how the interface architecture was suppose to even look like? Is the interface between the optic nerve and a healthy retina( with the rods and cones as sensors) no different than just any other electrical circuit ?

Re:Who figured out the interface protocol (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4139168)

hmm can you whack me up with an rgb ocular implant with built in ethernet so I can feed porn directly onto my eyes.

Woot! Ray Charles doesn't have to change his look (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#4138961)

They come in two classes, bright chrome shades and cheap sunglasses

Interesting (1, Informative)

mgeneral (512297) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139022)

Above everything else, the advancements science is making on vision is amazing. However poor that 10x10 image is, in time will get better. Personally, I was more intrigued by this story:
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/10.09/vision.ht ml [wired.com]
where the scientist is actually inserting probes in the brain to stimulate the nuerons that produce the image we need to see with. It sounds as though he is having better success, assuming that the patient was able to drive a car (albeit limited) after the operation. That 10x10 image doesn't leave me feeling that the patient could get in a car and drive, much less distinguish what he's looking at.

Re:Interesting (1)

aWalrus (239802) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139135)

The most important difference between that article and this one is that this approach uses the artificial retina artifact instead of the big setup in that other technique. I think this would allow higher miniaturization and eventually lead to the integration of the camera and processing equipment in a single implant (much easier to "install" than the neural implant).


--

I seem to remember... (1)

DJPsychoChild (581154) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139149)

I seem to remember reading something like this in a story once. The main character was blind, and underwent surgery (didn't get into many details) that gave him back sight. He had never seen anything before, and in the end went insane from all the colors etc. etc. and gauged his eyes out. Things that he had known from touch & sound weren't what he imagined...

Just something to think about.

Yes! (1)

Thaidog (235587) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139225)

I need this!

Nerds demand more bionic parts! (0)

Monev (559960) | more than 12 years ago | (#4139297)

I am waiting for the bionic ass and the bionic wang.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?