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!

LCD Screen With Embedded Optical Sensors

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the the-screen-that-looks-back dept.

Displays 113

dk3nn3dy writes "Sharp has developed a LCD display with optical sensors built into the displays pixels, without requiring a touch-sensitive film to be bonded on top of the regular screen. The optical sensor is similar to that used in scanners, allowing for notes or business cards to be scanned by the screen itself. As the optical recognition technology is built into the pixels it also simplifies tactile recognition based on simultaneously touching multiple points. Future uses include fingerprint authentication on the screen of your mobile phone or PDA, or iPhone style touch recognition. Volume production will start next spring."

cancel ×

113 comments

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

Is it true? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20454845)

Future uses include fingerprint authentication on the screen

I heard development was funded almost entirely by Windex.

Smile! You're being filmed! (2, Funny)

__NR_kill (1018116) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455225)

Imagine all those pron websites "watching" all those wankers..
Big Brother will get a new swing in it's name..

Re:Smile! You're being filmed! (2, Interesting)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455301)

We'll have to stop with the "In Soviet Russia computer monitors YOU!" jokes.

Schizophrenics will finally be able to say "See - it IS watching me!"

Of course, since they're more sensitive to IR than to visible wavelengths, you can defeat them by pointing a heat lamp at them. You'll still be able to see the picture, but "they" won't be able to see you.

1984 (1)

MikeFM (12491) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456117)

A little to much like 1984 for my tastes although it seems this technology is pretty cool. It's all in how it's used. I wonder if they could implement this in screens without users knowing. That is the scariest part I think. Still, hiding a camera in a standard tv wouldn't be that hard so no huge deal unless cable companies begin giving televisions away for nothing or something suspicious like that.

Re:1984 (1)

glarbl_blarbl (810253) | more than 6 years ago | (#20457599)

There is a book by Peter W. Huber called "Orwell's Revenge: a 1984 palimpsest" which has a very interesting take on this notion. Huber took all of Eric Blair's writing and fed it into a computer (a 386 IIRC, it was written in the early nineties). Then he cut-and-pasted together a completely different story, using Orwell's own words and phrases, in which people were able to resist Big Brother by exploiting the bi-directional nature of the telescreens. Basically he looks at the telescreen network as what the internet could look like with this technology and with the textual content removed (again IIRC).


It's a shame that book isn't more widely known. It was a novel (ha-ha) concept in form and well executed, I was reminded of it when I read Cryptonomicon. If it helps you geeks to go find the book at all, the dude who wrote it was teaching at MIT at the time.

Re:1984 (2, Funny)

Bloke down the pub (861787) | more than 6 years ago | (#20462133)

If you hold a mirror up in front of it, then it sets up a feedback loop and burns out the camera. Feller who used to work for the BBC told me once.

Re:Is it true? (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455811)

Future uses include fingerprint authentication on the screen
Not to mention the various manufacturers of gummi bears.

Re:Is it true? (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455871)

What about Apple? They filed a patent a year or so back on a type of display that had a camera element on each pixel (apparently the current iMac isn't enough like Orwell's telescreen for them).

Re:Is it true? (2, Informative)

JaWiB (963739) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456691)

http://www.engadget.com/2006/04/26/apple-patent-em beds-thousands-of-cameras-among-lcd-pixels/ [engadget.com] I dunno, sounds like this is just for touchscreen applications, but Apple was focusing on using the screen as a webcam. What the difference between "optical sensors" and "thousands of cameras" is I do not know.

Re:Is it true? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20456933)

Remember those jokes that people sent around thru e-mail taking the user to a web site that "takes your picture" and then show a monkey pic when you click a button to take the pic? Well, whos laughing now? ;-)

Re:Is it true? (4, Funny)

Hucko (998827) | more than 6 years ago | (#20458495)

You got a monkey pic ...?

Focus length? (2, Interesting)

Chairboy (88841) | more than 6 years ago | (#20454851)

I wonder if this technology could be used to two-way displays? Instead of a discrete camera, just have the whole screen be an interferometry based "camera". Video phone where you're looking at each other instead of slightly off to one side...

Re:Focus length? (3, Interesting)

hedwards (940851) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455045)

Unlikely, the lens technology is almost assuredly limited to focusing just a mm or so beyond the front glass. This might be the start of that ability, but I would expect for the video phone to arrive before that does. People by and large just don't want to have to worry about their appearance when calling or emailing.

I would be very curious to hear how they are planning to deal with the fingerprints and scratching that will almost assuredly occur.

Re:Focus length? (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 6 years ago | (#20457847)

Most decent mobiles have a video camera mounted on the front these days anyway.. stills camera on the back, video cam on the front. Not that I've ever used it of course.

My phone also has a touchscreen, which doesn't have any scratches that I've noticed, and the fingerprints just wipe off... we already have all the technology for loads of cool stuff that is supposedly 'future' tech. We just don't have the right pricing schemes.. stupid greedy telcos..

Re:Focus length? (1)

quenda (644621) | more than 6 years ago | (#20460215)

> but I would expect for the video phone to arrive before that does

Where have you been? Millions of people have cell-phones with video-call capability,
they just don't use it much. It has been around for years now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3G [wikipedia.org]

wiki say 200 million subscribers.

Re:Focus length? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20455459)

Instead of a discrete camera, just have the whole screen be an interferometry based "camera".

To do interferometry you need coherent lighting.

Re:Focus length? (1)

mikael (484) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455555)

If scientists can construct a neural network that can simulate the infra-red vision of snake [physorg.com] , then doing the same with the display of a LCD shouldn't be that difficult. Each light sensor element will pick up a sample of light in a conical or rectangular shape. It would just be a matter of deblurring the image [physorg.com] .

Re:Focus length? (1)

cnettel (836611) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456361)

The real issue is how small the cone where you get a sharp image would be. In the edges of the screen, you don't have enough data to deblur (you would need pixels beyond the edge to get the full information). You might realize that you can indeed resolve quite fine details, but only for a few pixels in the absolute center, relying on all other pixels to remove the adjacent noise.

Re:Focus length? (1)

obarel (670863) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456661)

I've come up with a name for this invention.

How about "telescreen"?

Re:Focus length? (1)

Abrilon (976863) | more than 6 years ago | (#20457595)

Apple has patented that technology... it was news in 2006 but have not heard of it since. http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn9059 [newscientist.com]

Re:Focus length? (1)

Breakfast Pants (323698) | more than 6 years ago | (#20459017)

Yep, it was posted to Slashdot as well, but I can't find the article.

Re:Focus length? (1)

rmessenger (1078643) | more than 6 years ago | (#20459097)

"...have the whole screen be an interferometry based 'camera' " Nice thought, but this would be near impossible. Each pixel would be receiving light from every direction at once. Trying to resolve an image on a mat of photoreceptors open to the light without any kind of lens is like grafting your retinas to your forehead.

Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (3, Funny)

B5_geek (638928) | more than 6 years ago | (#20454853)

Aside from the obvious concerns; this sounds like a great tech that could allow ....

shit everything I can think of is evil..

sorry. =)

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (4, Interesting)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 6 years ago | (#20454961)

Aside from the obvious concerns; this sounds like a great tech that could allow ....
shit everything I can think of is evil..
sorry. =)


Right, just like your keyboard allows you to share your most personal and private info to the world. But you just won't, how about that.

Also: it works as a scanner, not a camera. It sees in focus only what's directly placed on top of the screen.

Good for barcode scanning, touchscreens, or portable scanner. As well as a bunch of other quite cool and "non-evil" uses.

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (1)

MBraynard (653724) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455087)

Even with it's current capability, I'd suppose various image disgrognification algorythms could discern something that isn't pressed to the screen.

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (1)

p0tat03 (985078) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455345)

Yes, but how many of you already have webcams attached to your desktops/laptops? How is this technology any different? Hard-wire a "on" LED to the optical sensors and you've got a foolproof protection. Some hacker turns your "camera" on? No sweat, the power LED lights up like a Christmas tree. Almost all webcams have it, and my MacBook Pro does also.

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (1)

Goaway (82658) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455605)

How is this technology any different?
It is different in that the webcam can actually take a picture of you, while this can't.

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (1)

p0tat03 (985078) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455665)

I was assuming that the doomsayers getting all up in arms are right, and that this technology can be adapted to give useful images... But you're right, there is absolutely nothing to worry about. Though... A webcam embedded behind the LCD would be very cool, and eliminate the current problem of "I'm talking to you but I'm not looking at you".

Onyxia (1)

ShakaUVM (157947) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456809)

What's worse was the old UNIX problem with anyone able to access the microphone and speakers on a remote machine. Had a lot of fun in the office with that one, back in the day. Also, since you could by default run apps on the local console in X, we'd throw up screensavers and xview -display 0:0 various images (like Mike Tyson biting the ear off).

There's nothing better to do with a $300,000 SGI Onyx than to have it meow at you every once in a while.

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20461707)

Yes, but how many of you already have webcams attached to your desktops/laptops? How is this technology any different?

Not to side with the nutjobs, but you can physically block the lens of the webcam with a piece of tape or something.

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (2, Insightful)

cellocgw (617879) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456583)

Even with it's current capability, I'd suppose various image disgrognification algorythms could discern something that isn't pressed to the screen.
No it couldn't, any more than a blank sheet of photographic paper could produce an image (all by itself). Simply put: unless there is a lens, or a pinhole (Google for things like "pinhole camera"), or as someone mentioned, each detector element has a drastically limited field of view, like a dragonfly eye, you won't get an image. Each element in this case just collects the light that hits it. Just like a proximity scanner.
If you project an image, using an external lens, then you'll get a picture. Otherwise not.

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (1)

MarkKnopfler (472229) | more than 6 years ago | (#20458633)

Any device one uses to store/transmit any personal information is a security threat. Would be a good idea to install software/hardware which you know are secure. Otherwise everything is pretty much open to exploitation.

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (1)

Nirvelli (851945) | more than 6 years ago | (#20460831)

Unfortunately, it's a lot easier to clean ass marks off the copier than an LCD.

In Soviet Eurasia, TV watches... (2, Insightful)

VValdo (10446) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455047)

Winston sprang to attention in front of the telescreen, upon which the image of a youngish woman, scrawny but muscular, dressed in tunic and gym-shoes, had already appeared.

'Arms bending and stretching!' she rapped out. 'Take your time by me. One, two, three, four! One, two, three, four! Come on, comrades, put a bit of life into it! One, two, three, four! One, two, three, four!'

[......]

  'Smith!' screamed the shrewish voice from the telescreen. '6079 Smith W.! Yes, you! Bend lower, please! You can do better than that. You're not trying. Lower, please! That's better, comrade. Now stand at ease, the whole squad, and watch me.'

A sudden hot sweat had broken out all over Winston's body. His face remained completely inscrutable. Never show dismay! Never show resentment! A single flicker of the eyes could give you away. He stood watching while the instructress raised her arms above her head and -- one could not say gracefully, but with remarkable neatness and efficiency -- bent over and tucked the first joint of her fingers under her toes.

'There, comrades! That's how I want to see you doing it. Watch me again. I'm thirty-nine and I've had four children. Now look.' She bent over again. 'You see my knees aren't bent. You can all do it if you want to,' she added as she straightened herself up. 'Anyone under forty-five is perfectly capable of touching his toes.

--George Orwell, "1984"

W

Re:In Soviet Eurasia, TV watches... (1)

samkass (174571) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456739)

Ironically, perhaps, because of a certain commercial 20 years ago, Apple patented a similar technology a few years ago.

Although, the first piece of media that this brought to my mind wasn't 1984, but that news sketch from The Kentucky Fried Movie... I guess I'm not as socially conscious as you.

Re:In Soviet Eurasia, TV watches... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20457775)

You are the worst kind of whore there is. You are an idiot and a sheep.

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455079)

Aside from the obvious concerns; this sounds like a great tech that could allow ....

shit everything I can think of is evil..


BTW name one "evil" thing this technology allows, which isn't allowed in theory by the 3G phones.

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456165)

BTW name one "evil" thing this technology allows, which isn't allowed in theory by the 3G phones.
Justifying all those nasty fingerprints on the display. :-)

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20455559)

Resolved: Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken, and buying a shiny new Mac does not make you a Mac user. Hear that, you filthy fucking switcheurs? You are NOT Mac users.

Real Mac users don't use Macs for the image. Real Mac users didn't just buy their Macs last week at Hot Topic. We've been here on the Mac platform since 1984* and believe me, we resent the recent influx of switcheurs almost as much as we don't give a damn about PC users.

(* Those who understand the Mac aesthetic are grandfathered in as latent Mac users, of course, regardless of the first time they used a Mac. But if you're still trying desperately to maximize your windows, if you enter instead of return, backspace instead of delete, or if you've ever called the Command key "open Apple"—you most definitely don't belong in this category.)

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20456459)

Since when did Mac become religion?

Re:Queue the Big-Brother/Orwell freaks in..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20457511)

We'll have to go ahead and get you another copy of that memo.

butt print photo copies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20454859)

Now in full color, real time, and high resolution.

Re:butt print photo copies (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 6 years ago | (#20458667)

"butt print photo copies"

Here on Slashdot, that'd only occur if they made a keyboard with these sensors.

heh (1)

JoeCommodore (567479) | more than 6 years ago | (#20454867)

I recall a ID-10T report about a user holding up a document to the screen so the "Techie" could see it on-line or something to that effect. Sounds like that story will become anachronistic .

Old joke? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20454883)

This reminds me of the old tech-support urban legend of the user holding a page up to the screen and hitting "Print".

Re:Old joke? (1)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455025)

This reminds me of the old tech-support urban legend of the user holding a page up to the screen and hitting "Print".

Yup. Another joke I knew was about paper-thin flexible displays, and then what do you know, LCD-s happened, then e-ink, then OLED and organic LCD ...

And it's not that funny anymore ;)

Re:Old joke? (1)

maxwell demon (590494) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456133)

And I still remember the jokes about viruses in email messages ... Remember the signature virus?

But... (5, Funny)

Unique2 (325687) | more than 6 years ago | (#20454941)

How do I see the screen to click the 'Scan' button when I've got the document in front of it?

Re:But... (1)

phulegart (997083) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456607)

the screen could be wider than a standard piece of paper

the scan could be on a delay, where you hit your button, wait 5 ticks, and scan

the scan could be initiated by covering the screen with the paper (indicating to the scanning program that you have placed the paper in the optimum scanning position)

you could hit the scan button on your keyboard ... just for a start...

Re:But... (1)

Ajehals (947354) | more than 6 years ago | (#20457143)

Going by current UI design and the generally usability of some applications I wouldn't be surprised if you had to click on one button to start the scan and another to stop it, Oh and removing the page before you stop it would mean you had to start again..

Re:But... (1)

Raideen (975130) | more than 6 years ago | (#20459541)

It brings a new meaning to "can you see what's on my screen?" at the helpdesk.

Apple Patent (2, Interesting)

xirtam_work (560625) | more than 6 years ago | (#20454967)

I'm sure I've seen an Apple Inc. patent for a device that does this. It might even have been posted here on Slashdot.

Hopefully these sensors only work up close like a scanner, rather than like a webcam.

Re:Apple Patent (1)

solevita (967690) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455091)

Engadget reported on this here [engadget.com]

I haven't searched, but I wouldn't be surprised if it made it to /. too.

Apple patent on "Integrated sensing display" (4, Interesting)

wal9001 (1041058) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455789)

Planar has something similar... (1)

zalas (682627) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455991)

Interesting... Coincidentally, Planar demoed a type of monitor like this in the Emerging Technologies room at SIGGRAPH 2007. It sounds like this Sharp monitor uses embedded sensors, but the Planar one just uses one of the transistors in the TFT matrix as an phototransistor. I tried one out and it was pretty neat. One of the drawbacks right now is that shadows causes problems when trying to determine if a user has pressed a certain part of the screen. Furthermore, this sensor requires some sort of illumination, such as a lamp or something shining on the display. They talked about perhaps integrating some sort of microlens system to focus on a particular plane, such as right above the screen, to highlight objects in that plane.

One neat thing they did was place a document on top of the monitor and turned off the surrounding lights. If the monitor displayed a pure white image, the resulting sensor readout gave you a (low-quality) scan of the document.

Re:Apple Patent (1)

Anarchitect_in_oz (771448) | more than 6 years ago | (#20460903)

Even more Concidentially the screen is the same spec as the current iPhone screen.
160Dpi 3.5inch 320x480.
it could be a drop in replacement...

Does this mean us blonde folks.... (2, Funny)

AmazingRuss (555076) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455015)

...will no longer be ridiculed for using whiteout on the screen?

Re:Does this mean us blonde folks.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20455081)


we wouldn't ridicule for being blonde, congrats on putting a sentence together [youtube.com] though ;)

Re:Does this mean us blonde folks.... (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455085)

Nope. That's very much a part of the popular lexicon, just like "blondes have more fun." You're stuck with it.

monkey (5, Funny)

Inmatarian (814090) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455039)

This reminds me of that old 1995 email joke about having a scanner in your screen, and you could hold your face up to it and it would take your picture. Of course, all it did was load a picture of a monkey and said this was you.

Re:monkey (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20457061)

load a picture of a monkey and said this was you

I hear the president is very pleased with his picture.

Re:monkey (1)

Durkheim (960021) | more than 6 years ago | (#20461179)

I remember that one, was submitted to me by a friend. Then i forwarded it to my father.
God, please forgive me.

Think of the porn posibilities (0)

future assassin (639396) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455041)

Stick your thang to the sreen which activates an server side action and the girl in the movie puts her lips on your thang.

Most screens already have this feature (4, Funny)

davidc (91400) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455093)

All you need is the right software to access it. Fortunately, there are several websites out there that allow you to do this - e.g. amazingcamera.com [amazingcamera.com]

Re:Most screens already have this feature (1)

PMBjornerud (947233) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456001)

Wow, it wasn't a goatse!?!

I was already looking away before following the link. When the "stare into the red dot" message came up, I donned arc welding goggles, backed up 5 meters and clicked next with a 16-foot pole.

Re:Most screens already have this feature (1)

ichigo 2.0 (900288) | more than 6 years ago | (#20457345)

Come on people, it's just pixels on a screen, goatse can't hurt you.

Re:Most screens already have this feature (1)

Prof.Phreak (584152) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456641)

That is so 1990s... :-)

Re:Most screens already have this feature (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20457517)

I clicked on that link and was surprised at the accuracy of the computer generated photo.
The background is a little out of focus, but I guess it's because of the angle as it's looking down and would be mostly water.
They keep the screen higher up and pointing down when I use the computer nowadays, because one time it got splashed and shorted out. If it was not you could see Bill with the side hair, the man who doesn't feed me and the door to the laboratory.

Eeek! Kiosk=public video monitor (1)

jkinney3 (535278) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455107)

So now there can be a transcript of what you look at that is matched up with who was looking at it with a picture of the face overlayed on the screen for BigBrother to use as he wishes. Once again, all technology advances are really sharp double-edged swords.
The more tech I use the better I like writing in the sand on a beach...

YOU fAIL IT (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20455245)

its corpse turned of the[ GNAA I a way to 5pend = 1400 NetBSD

Great... (1)

turnipsatemybaby (648996) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455343)

So not only are people going to be ENCOURAGED to constantly touch and smudge my screen, but I'll have to worry about reformatting my hard drive when I take a cleaning cloth to it...

YWou fai7 it (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20455355)

that they can hold short of a miracle haapiness Another people already; I'm about half of the Arseholes at Walnut numbers continue Don't walk around Nearly two years

Nothing to see here (1)

djsparhawk (1107233) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455489)

Is this even new technology? a 3.5" screen with optical sensors so that you can multitouch it to your hearts content. Isn't that what an iPhone is anyway? Sure the screen may stare into your soul and big brother will be able to keep tabs on you, provided your incriminating evidence is lying on the screen.

Imagine the possibilities... (1)

Guanine (883175) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455495)

... if this were combined with an 2nd generation iPhone and Delicious Library [delicious-monster.com] . It'd be like a handheld barcode scanner to catalog all your stuff. Oh wait, still no SDK.

Knowledge Navigator (1)

sakusha (441986) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455531)

This scanning screen reminds me of Apple's old conceptual project "Knowledge Navigator." In one scene of the video, a man is learning to read with the assistance of the device, he takes a newspaper article and wipes it across the screen. The computer scans it and gives him a reading lesson from the scanned article.

The Knowledge Navigator project was 20 years ago. Many of the ideas in the video have already become reality, this scanning screen might be the next one.

Re:Knowledge Navigator (1)

shmlco (594907) | more than 6 years ago | (#20457185)

Heck, nearly every spy movie or TV show made in the last few decades has some scene in it where the guy presses his thumb to the computer screen and it scans it. Guess they were just ahead of their time.

A New Frontier for Identity Theft (0, Flamebait)

iamdrscience (541136) | more than 6 years ago | (#20455689)

Future uses include fingerprint authentication
Awesome, so now if somebody installs a trojan on my PC they won't just be able to steal my bank account passwords and credit card numbers, but they'll be able to get my fingerprints too. Hopefully they can make this screen able to scan documents too, then I could help out identity thieves some more and send them a copy of my birth certificate, drivers license and passport as well.

Re:A New Frontier for Identity Theft (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20457845)

Actually, if it's a trojan, then you're the one who installed it. Heh.

In soviet russia... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20455733)

LCD screen observes YOU!

There goes Vidi-Kopy (1)

noidentity (188756) | more than 6 years ago | (#20456181)

"The optical sensor is similar to that used in scanners, allowing for notes or business cards to be scanned by the screen itself. "

Darn, I guess Penn & Teller's Vidi-Kopy [wikipedia.org] gag can't be considered fiction anymore.

Tech support stories... (2, Funny)

exploder (196936) | more than 6 years ago | (#20457391)

So there's the guy who thought his cd-rom tray was a cup holder, the lady who thought the mouse was a foot pedal, and the guy who thought you could fax a document by holding it up to the screen.

That last guy should have patented it!

Mirror 2.0? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20457677)

Could this be the beginning of Mirror 2.0? Then we can make products using it that we will never need.

I know people say it's not the same, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20457795)

am I the only one who'se reminded of Orwell's tele-screens, here?

The way things are going, it might just happen...

(yes, call me an "Orwell freak" or whatever you want to call me...)

Scanner TouchScreen (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 6 years ago | (#20457909)

Sharp has developed a LCD display with optical sensors built into the displays pixels,

Yes! I've been asking for that exact feature since I got my first notebook PC in 1997.

without requiring a touch-sensitive film to be bonded on top of the regular screen

NO! I've been asking for that exact feature, a touchscreen scanner, since I got my first notebook PC in 1997.

Add the touchscreen.

And, since I've been asking for it since I got my first notebook PC in 1997, please include a "shape memory" [wikipedia.org] layer that physically interacts with my finger on the touchscreen. So onscreen "G"UI widgets get real edges and real 3D interaction, to cue my fingertip gestures.

If they make it a printer on standard (uncoated) A4 (or arbitrary sized) paper, then they're almost done. I'd settle for it projecting a 500W, 5m wide image on a desk, wall or floor. Plugged into AC, of course. I'll get to the battery people later.

One step closer to Globals... (1)

silentbozo (542534) | more than 6 years ago | (#20458269)

Anyone remember the handheld pda/phone from that short-lived Earth: Final Conflict TV series? I always envied those handhelds, with the built in camera, videophone, computing/storage unit, color rollup screens and contact scanner.

Ten years later, we've got the camera, the phone, and the storage/computing unit as everyone's personal computing device. Now all we need to do is to integrate the rollup screens and this new invention... and of course, move everyone to Vancouver.

what ? (1)

s0m3body (659892) | more than 6 years ago | (#20458529)

From TFA: "Also, the scanner function can be used to scan in a business card placed on top of the screen, ..."
Frankly, what for ?
Have you ever received a business card with words: "Have a look, but I need it back !" ???

Re:what ? (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 6 years ago | (#20458715)

From TFA: "Also, the scanner function can be used to scan in a business card placed on top of the screen, ..."
Frankly, what for ?
Have you ever received a business card with words: "Have a look, but I need it back !" ???


Nope. But I have had to carry a pile of cards home from a trade show. I've also lost business cards, having them on my computer somewhere would have been convenient. I've also passed on business cards to other people. A digital version would have made that easier. Etc.

Plenty of reasons why. Heck, I wish my cell phone could do it. It could grab barcodes, too.

Re:what ? (1)

s0m3body (659892) | more than 6 years ago | (#20458821)

Ok, that's obviously a question of personal preferences, but I can much easier handle 100 business cards (real) then 100 JPEGs somewhere on my microSD card which is plugged in somewhere in my mobile phone (God knows where the bugger is ! I tried !).
At least, it is much faster to throw away the 90 useless ones.
The day after the big trade show party, once I get sober enough to realize which are those.

now this is usefull... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20458733)

http://www.bash.org/?291262 [bash.org]

at least, in one case it will be...

Offices Beware... (1)

tantaliz3 (1074234) | more than 6 years ago | (#20459527)

New way to discreetly Photo-Copy Ass.

Re:Offices Beware... (1)

ArAgost (853804) | more than 6 years ago | (#20461335)

I'm trying to figure out how facing a monitor with one's asshole could be defined "discreet", but I can't.

Could it be the beginning of... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20460171)

... electronic silly putty?

All OLED screens can do this already (5, Informative)

maokh (781515) | more than 6 years ago | (#20460745)

All LEDs inversely function as light detectors, even while emitting light. All that is really needed is a display controller that is designed to detect this reverse current flow. It would be interesting to see such an application. The only thing I have seen so far is a traditional LED matrix that works like a touch screen to turn each individual LED on and off.

Don't believe me? Here is a primer:

http://mvh.sr.unh.edu/mvhinvestigations/light_inve stigations.htm [unh.edu]

Re:All OLED screens can do this already (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20462077)

Only OLEDs, or is that a typo?

LED do that without sensors (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20461267)

LED do that without sensors so OLED might do it as well.
It is known that the electric resistence of a LED is lower when it is lit up externally so if you put something bright near it, the resistence lowers because it receives its own light back. I wonder if it works for organic leds too, so if you can sense the resistence of every pixel on a OLED display you can know if there is something bright in front of each pixel. The image would be B/W I guess but I think it must be cheap and enough sensitive to make multi-touch displays.
White hand palms in colour people might mean evolution thinks further than we do. ;)

In Soviet Russia (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20461351)

Why does an AC have to say it?

In Soviet Russia screen watches YOU!

I can't believe no-one's said it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20462411)

In Soviet Russia, screen looks at you!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>