Bionic Eye Could Restore Vision

MattSparkes writes "A new bionic eye could restore vision to the profoundly blind. A prototype was tested on six patients and 'within a few weeks all could detect light, identify objects and even perceive motion again. For one patient, this was the first time he had seen anything in half a century.' The user wears a pair of glasses that contain a miniature camera and that wirelessly transmits video to a cellphone-sized computer in the wearer's pocket. This computer processes the image information and wirelessly transmits it to a tiny electronic receiver implanted in the wearer's head."

Comments

Implants for healthy people

[Harmonious Botch]

I imagine that in the not too distant future some perfectly healthy geek will have one of these implanted. I'd seriously consider it when resolution gets to about 24 bit SVGA ( It will have to have fast PGP on the wireless connection so that I control what I am seeing. I do not want my optical nerve spammed directly ).
I hope there is a 'turn-off-and-see-through' option that lets you use the original organic hardware when you want.

It works even better if it is implanted in an infant, so that the brain can adapt to it as it grows. This will, of course, be considered child abuse when it is first done. In a century or two it will be considered abuse NOT to have it done for your kid.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[timeOday]

I imagine that in the not too distant future some perfectly healthy geek will have one of these implanted.

Sure, but not instead of a perfectly good eyeball. Triclops, anyone?

Actually, I hope implants aren't the only way. Just give me the wearable version. Our brains are highly evolved to make use of our eyes, so I doubt there's much to be gained by cutting open healthy people for direct access to nerves.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[badboy_tw2002]

Mods are on crack - this is actual interesting discussion.

There's too much we don't know aobut infant vision to mess with the brains early development - although who knows what stuff like television is already doing to us. However, I think it would be better to have these for overlays and such - where it mixes both the incoming light and anything being fed in from the connection. SVGA seems a little low resolution wise - don't forget this is your whole field of vision. You'd want probably 4-5 times that at least to resolve floating screens and such in front of you.

Don't forget to add those aural implants for Dolby 600 channel sound!

Re:Implants for healthy people

[ArcherB]

Just give me the wearable version.

Only if it looks like a banana clip!

Re:Implants for healthy people

[drinkypoo]

All I want is a grid of PV cells with appropriate filtering circuitry etc installed directly into my retina, and a variable (deformable) lens installed to replace my cornea, with maybe another one so that I can have zoom without having things move (much) inside my eye. The former can provide things like IR vision, and if it can transmit a very short distance, recording, albeit only in greyscale without having redundant elements and color-pass filters. All I care about is IR. And the zoom! That would be so amazingly useful. Telescope, microscope... The only challenge there is controlling saccades so that you can still get a useful image, maybe by filtering them down to a lesser movement.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[monopole]

This must be stopped until HDCP is implemented for the visual cortex. Otherwise people will be able to see protected content without DRM! Of course once reliable HDCP is implemented it should then be mandatory, plugging the analog hole once and for all!

Re:Implants for healthy people

[indigest]

The possibilities here are very intriguing. The study that the article mentioned used a pair of glasses with a camera. But there's no reason why those glasses/cameras would need to be on your face. You could literally set up eyes in the back of your head, a security camera monitored by yourself, or expand your field of vision to be much larger. Also, you could set up a virtual reality sim just by playing back a recorded stream of visual data into your implant.

Of course, the possibilities for mischief with such an implant are also endless. These things would be in high demand for poker games and high school locker rooms and about a billion other things that criminals and perverts will think up.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[skoaldipper]

One of the real challenges (I would imagine) such as this chip implant on the retina is keeping it in place. Retina surgery alone isn't guaranteed. The fluid pushing against that lining can vary with age or even something like cabin pressure from an airplane ride. The synergy between medicine and engineering here really is a marvel example of our body's design and function. It's a testament to both. Personally, I prefer non evasive enhancements for what you mention; like a disposable super contact lens.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Anonymous Coward]

I doubt there's much to be gained by cutting open healthy people for direct access to nerves.

Don't be silly. Along with some sort of input method this could integrate computers into our bodies. You could browse the Internet wherever you wanted, watch DVDs in HD wherever you want (cram the disc in your mouth as Fry says), and have ultra-high resolution hot porn when you are banging your ultra-high resolution SO (who needs a paper bag)! Heck, think of what this could do for deathmatches! And we all know that you would rather be playing WoW during a meeting that listening to some boring presentation about quality assurance methods, right?

Implant me now!

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Dachannien]

There's too much we don't know aobut infant vision to mess with the brains early development

An interesting tidbit on this topic: Scientists have done experiments in cats where they've blocked all incoming light to the cat's eyes during early kittenhood. A portion of the visual cortex does not organize properly without this input, causing the cats to have permanent non-functional vision. A similar effect is seen in human children who are born with cataracts or develop them very shortly after birth.

(Hubel and Wiesel received part of the 1981 Nobel Prize in Physiology/Medicine for this work done through the 1960s and 70s.)

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't think about the high school locker room situation, but I see you quickly did...

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Drooling Iguana]

I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[suv4x4]

It works even better if it is implanted in an infant, so that the brain can adapt to it as it grows. This will, of course, be considered child abuse when it is first done. In a century or two it will be considered abuse NOT to have it done for your kid.

That makes sense! I'd even go further and say than in a century or to it'd be abuse NOT to directly throw out your newborn in the trash and replace it with a robot toy!

Let's keep the discussion real. I also enjoy Ghost in the Shell series, it's very cool and futuristic, but even in that anime people didn't force implants on their infants unless they were really sick and needed it to live normally (or at all).

Re:Implants for healthy people

[charlieman]

I imagine that in the not too distant future some perfectly healthy geek will have one of these implanted

Yeah, specially if they use the see thought filter.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[nmb3000]

SVGA seems a little low resolution wise - don't forget this is your whole field of vision. You'd want probably 4-5 times that at least to resolve floating screens and such in front of you.

IANAB, but as I recall, our vision is already not quite as great as it appears to be at first glance (ha ha). Our eyes essentially experience "page faults", where something we want to see isn't available because we have poor "resolution" in everywhere except a small cone around the center of our field of view. There is also a spot directly in the center of this cone that is lower resolution. Our brains compensate for these deficiencies by quickly moving our eyes around to take in a larger area, then making composite image.

The same type of thing takes place when watching animation. The brain builds missing information from previous and next frames of reference.

Again, I'm no expert, but I imagine that at least some of the technological problems may very well be overcome by the brain's compensation abilities, especially if the devices were implanted as early as possible after birth.

Personally, I think it would be pretty neat to have uber-night vision as well as the ability to switch to other spectrums like ultraviolet or x-rays (ala Geordi's VISOR).

Re:Implants for healthy people

[queenb**ch]

I'd settled for having my vision augmented for UV, IR, and other spectra normally not visible. Particularly in low light conditions. Besides, it would be cool to never have to take my sunglasses off again.

2 cents,

QueenB.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Awperaiter]

Ghosts in Shells get Bionic-eyes in Sockets. Me funny.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Awperaiter]

Did that last post make much sense? Sheesh.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Awperaiter]

The "last post" mentioned in the last post is, actually, a lost post. I mean, the "last post" mentioned in the real last post is a post that I intended to post, but didn't. So I'm not going crazy. I'm also not trying to be funny here (intentionally). (Half-Life 2 players can extract a few more laughs from this post. Again, I'm not trying (No, really) to be funny. This is all spontaneity.)

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Awperaiter]

Wow. This should be right in line with wanting to introduce myself as a sane member of society...

Re:Implants for healthy people

[pete-classic]

SVGA seems a little low resolution wise

I'm talking completely out of my ass here, but I'm pretty sure that isn't how the eye works.

My (limited) understanding is that the "resolution" of the eye is very low, but the "framerate" is extremely high, and is backed up by special purpose hardware that is able to "stitch" lots of low-rez frames into a high-rez view in near-real time.

-Peter

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Nullav]

Well, I imagine we'd need one implant, for the brain to receive information from the false eye, but who says the false eye needs to be implanted? You could find all kinds of crazy applications for an electronic eye,like night vision. Why stick to imitating the eye and its limited peripheral vision? Am I the only one thinking of an eye helmet?

Re:Implants for healthy people

[blank axolotl]

I imagine that in the not too distant future some perfectly healthy geek will have one of these implanted.

The problem is, the signal is sent to the optic nerve according to the article -- which is already being used by your eyes if they are healthy. The signal from the camera would interfere the signal from your eye, effectively blinding it (probably). Therefore the current system is only useful to blind people who aren't using their optic nerve.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Anonymous Coward]

I think I speak for all geeks when I say...X-Ray. 'nough said.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[KlaymenDK]

You might want to think that over once more -- if you can see UV and especially IR, you definitely *would* need to wear sunglasses more often ... or be blinded by remote controls, garage door openers, people beaming Palm data, and what have you.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[KlaymenDK]

You, sir, have been watching too much Star Trek.

Personally, I prefer non evasive enhancements The word you're looking for is invasive. :D

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Anonymous Coward]

INSIGHTFUL?!?

Re:Implants for healthy people

[TheRaven64]

Martin Turner from Manchester Computing gives a very interesting talk on this subject periodically at visualisation conferences. I don't have my notes to hand, but I'll see what I can remember...

The optic nerve is actually a lot lower bandwidth than you would expect it to be; it has nothing like the capacity to send the amount of visual data you think you see. One of the biggest tricks your eye does is something a lot like run length encoding. It sends differences in light levels between adjacent cones, rather than absolute light levels (this is why many optical illusions work, by the way).

You are right to say that a composite image is used. If you turn your head quickly, you will notice it takes around a second for you to build up an image of the new area. A more scientific test involves anaesthetising the mussels around the eye and locking the head in place. From this, you can discover non-invasively that humans don't see exactly in the middle of their field of view (the blind spot; dissect an eye to see why you have one, but it's basically bad connector design) or around the edges. Another experiment involved tracking eye movements and getting people to press a button when they moved their eyes; around 90% (I think) of eye movements were completely unconscious, and didn't relate to a change of attention.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[master_p]

Another nail in the coffin of intelligent design...

Re:Implants for healthy people

[elgatozorbas]

I imagine that in the not too distant future some perfectly healthy geek will have one of these implanted. I'd seriously consider it when resolution gets to about 24 bit SVGA

Real life is more than a spec sheet of bits and resolutions. The average blind person, for whom there is no other resort than to try this would probably be very excited over this technology, at any "resolution".

And he would most likely punch you in the face for not valuing your (working) eyesight enough, to the extent that you are willing to risk losing it over such a pointless experiment. (and because you appear to be into resolutions: methinks svga wouldn't even be an improvement over a normal eyesight).

Re:Implants for healthy people

[jamesshuang]

You know, IR devices aren't THAT bright. Most digital cameras can see IR - try it, point a remote at the lens and you can see the blinking. Admittedly, most cameras now have IR filters in them (since it's a pretty nice trick to use a visible light filter and see through light clothing using IR), but the effect is still pretty cool.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[jamesshuang]

Speaking as a neuroscience major with some eye tracking-related research experience, eye movements have two components of control - top down, and bottom up. Top down control basically means your consciousness controls where your eyes are looking, and bottom up basically means sensory input drives a "saccade", an unconscious but fast movement of the eyes, normally to a surprising, quickly moving, or dangerous stimuli. Your top-down control is actually very powerful, and if the given stimuli are not too powerful, you can almost completely suppress saccadic movements and focus on one point.

You are correct in the low-bandwidth optic nerve. Your optic nerve is carrying already heavily processed and compressed information. Only about a million ganglia are connected to the photoreceptors in your eye. The fovea has a one to one correspondence with ganglia, which gives you the high acuity in the center of your vision. Out toward the periphery, more and more photoreceptors connect to each ganglia, which means any particular ganglia is active for a very large spatial area of stimulation. This is why your peripheral vision is not as acute as the center.

Also, to the person suggesting that the optic nerve was a bad connector design, it's not. It's possibly the best connector for the situation, as with most of mother nature's designs. The sclera (outside of the eyeball) is extremely tough, and having each individual ganglia poke through its surface would be foolhardy, and very dangerous. In fact, if that were the case, evolution would make sure you couldn't move your eyes, because if you do, you'd most likely sever a pretty nice batch of the axons heading to your brain. Also, having it near the center of vision is a pretty good idea too, in order to reduce signal latency from any one portion of the retina. A much more valid criticism, however, is why your retina is inverted. The photoreceptors are on the bottom, so light reaching them have already passed through multiple layers of cells and stuff layered on top. Admittedly, having the photoreceptors at the bottom means the opsin disks are more easily cleaned up by the pigmented epithelium after they're used, but why not have macrophage-like structures on top that could scrub the opsins?

Re:Implants for healthy people

[KlaymenDK]

I know that 'blinded' is an overstatement. Just wanted to note that one would need to wear shades more rather than less.

Fun trick though, seeing through (oh, I don't know) clothing for example. :)

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Shai-kun]

"Take non-evasive maneuvers, Mr. Sulu!"

Re:Implants for healthy people

[toriver]

Modding any post in this thread as insightful is like a pun, that's probably the reason. Must be.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[alexj33]

Probably the reason the resolution isn't SVGA (800x600) is because during the operation, the docs would have to attach the thing to 480000 neurons. Now 16 or 64 pixel resolution makes a lot more sense, doesn't it?

Re:Implants for healthy people

[Dachannien]

Well, you know and I know that His Noodly Appendage wasn't really responsible for cat vision, but I don't see how a discussion on the veracity of evolution theory arises from those experiments.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[blakestah]

Don't get your hopes too high...there is a fundamental limitation. Each stimulation of the ganglion cells requires power and generates heat. The chips are currently planar, which means a lot of heat is generated for each stimulation. With 16 electrodes dissipating the heat is manageable...ultimately they will hit the high end. Due to the circulation around the retina and aqueous humor, the eye is a poor place to dissipate heat.

However, a 25 or 36 electrode version should be very possible. I don't see anyone volunteering to have an implant placed in their eye...but once implanted, the wearers could easily be programmed to "see" invisible IR or UV light - like Predator.

As a disclaimer, I went to college and graduate school with the CEO of Second Sight, and have worked with the cochlear implant engineers from Advanced Bionics (some of whom are at Second Sight now). The technology has definitely got a big future.

Re:Implants for healthy people

[oakgrove]

A fitting quote but you get extra points if you're pulling from the original Catcher in the Rye rather than the ripped off Ghost in the Shell.

Interesting

[scoot80]

So the image is recieved wirelesly into the brain basically. I wonder if they get any interference.. or can they maybe pick up TV channels?... that would be a bonus.

Re:Interesting

[LiquidCoooled]

I thought more about the shock from some prankster 'toothing goatse images around to unsuspecting phones.

Re:Interesting

[KUHurdler]

If you do that too much, you'll go blind.

One technical problem to solve

[Anonymous Coward]

The current prototype emits a disturbing strange sound whenever the bionic eye is activated.

Re:One technical problem to solve

[Anonymous Coward]

No, that's just the user geeking out with his new eye.

Chhh Chhhh Chhh CHhhhhhhh, (thinks: I am seeing you!)
Cchhhhh Chhh CHhh CHhhhhhhhh

After a while, he'll learn to subvocalize that sound effect to reduce the odd stares.

Extra features.

[zdc]

I'd personally opt for a HUD displaying the same stats found on the SIMS. This way, I know just what I need to be happy and successful.

Re:Nothing to see here

[Anonymous Coward]

It's about an eye. How is there nothing to see?

I am looking forward to this

[abradsn]

Literally, this will definately benefit my eye condition. I hope that this research turns out to be helpful. From what I understand so far though, it is just prolonging the inevitable... but hey, that's better than nothing.

In Related News...

[__aaclcg7560]

More women are upgrading to the bionic hand that will reach out and smack any perverts with a bionic eye. The uPrevert bionic hand will be a popular item for the holiday season.

Re:In Related News...

[databank]

That's only if the user gets the bionic x-ray eye upgrade.

Procedure shown on Apple Ad

[andy314159pi]

The procedure was shown on the Apple computer commercial.

Review

[Quzak]

+3 For the technology +2 For it actually working (would like to see more results data from a reputable source) +2 For bridging the gap between biological and technological distinctiveness (Resistance is futile) -2 For it being Wireless (prone to interference and hacking to the Nth degree, assuming this prototype has no security subsystems installed)

Re:Review

[Clever7Devil]

Bummer if somebody hacks your vision. Can't see anything because you're too busy closing pop-ups.

On a more serious note:
It may sound a little conspiratorial, but I for one don't want everything I'm looking at to be transmitted wirelessly. Add some GPS and "they" will not only know exactly where you are, but they'll see exactly what you're doing.

Re:Review

[drinkypoo]

-2 For it being Wireless (prone to interference and hacking to the Nth degree, assuming this prototype has no security subsystems installed)

It has to be wireless for now, because having a port embedded in the skin isn't currently practical. However "they" have discovered that deer's antlers get tied into the skin because they have a highly convoluted surface, with a lot of area, and for some reason the skin is able to attach to this. This is the technology we need to perfect to have ports in the skin.

In the ideal situation you would have some sort of nonchemical energy storage mechanism embedded inside of you, like perhaps a pair of counterrotating flywheels or something (but imagine what happens if the bearings fail) and you'd charge your system through the port. In the real world, though, until we develop the universal nanotech assembler, I think we'll have to power the system through the port, and feed data to it.

I want this technology now for two purposes. I want an audio jack for a stereo headset and mono mic functionality, and I want studs for mounting sunglasses that don't have to go around my head. I get headaches when I wear glasses, or when I wear headphones, and it hurts my ears something fierce to have those in-ear buds in them for too long, although I admit I haven't tried the custom-molded kind. However, I also find it horribly disorienting to have anything over my ears, especially just one ear, it's kind of like when you're walking next to the sound-deadening wall in the movie theater. That seems to disorient everyone a little bit, but it makes me nauseous.

Re:Review

[maxume]

Skin penetration, with picture:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/5140090.stm

Re:Review

[maryjane gonjasoft]

you wouldn't have to power up, i would think. the body creates electricity, if they master the bionic eye, who is to say they can't turn you into a damn big d-cell?

Re:Review

[mOdQuArK!]

Actually, there's some pretty active development on biologically-safe miniature fuel cells which generate electricity from the energy stored in your blood sugar. Not only could you power all those implants, but you could lose weight by using them a lot!

Re:Review

[Dunbal]

who is to say they can't turn you into a damn big d-cell?


      Whoa, so the matrix is real? ;)

Re:Review

[blincoln]

and I want studs for mounting sunglasses that don't have to go around my head.

You could get that right now if you wanted. Haven't you seen the scalp implants that let people mount metal spikes on their heads? Sort of a stainless-steel mohawk?

IMO it's not worth the trouble though. If the stud gets snagged on something when you're falling or moving fast for some other reason, you're going to do some serious damage to yourself.

Re:Review

[Smidge204]

In the ideal situation you would have some sort of nonchemical energy storage mechanism embedded inside of you, like perhaps a pair of counterrotating flywheels or something (but imagine what happens if the bearings fail) and you'd charge your system through the port.

I'd prefer a fuel cell that runs off of the glucose and oxygen already present in the bloodstream...
=Smidge=

Re:Review

[happyemoticon]

I believe Neal Stephenson's "The Diamond Age" had a guy whose vision had been hacked by nanorobots to deliver a small add banner at the periphery of his vision.

I think, given the choice, wireless is OK for this stage. Wireless invaders will only attack if they're within signal range and they have the motivation. Microorganisms will invade regardless. Any type of surgery or major laceration puts you at risk for infection, and if you have wires running into your head then you have a canal for germs to get to your central nervous system, where you have very little in the way of an immune system. Plus, you have to take sponge baths all the time.

The ultimate implementation for a bionic eye wouldn't require any wireless, because it would be self-contained in your head. But going whole hog like that when we're still working on transmitting information directly to the brain is overly-ambitious. I imagine once that technology reaches maturity you'll start to see people moving towards a self-contained 'eye'.

Re:Review

[Kierthos]

I would see that becoming a felony rather quickly once the first car accident occurs because some tool of a hacker thought it would be cute to transmit ads on a busy street.

One step closer

[Tiger Smile]

We're now one step closer to building a 1970's version of Lee Majors!

Now if only the eye could make the cool bionic sound.

Re:One step closer

[jpnews]

The description reads more like Geordi LaForge's visor, to me.

Re:One step closer

[Tiger Smile]

You're right it does. Which is really sad, because he never had a cool bionic sound.

saw something like this on sciam

[Anonymous Coward]

i believe i saw this, or something very like it, on an episode of scientific american frontiers almost a year ago . it's even possible to watch that portion of the episode online, provided you're willing to use either real or windows media.

Re:saw something like this on sciam

[Anonymous Coward]

The Silicon Retina, Carver Mead and Misha Mahowald, Scientific American, 1991.

(Unfortunately, is seems Scientific American do not archive anything before 2001 on their site.)

Nu Scientist is a fricking linkspamming rag, note how the url in the summary includes the submitters name as a variable? No free click from me buddy.

Nu Scientist is a bunch of populist science "lite". They have a lot of nerve to even use the word Scientist in their name.

Here's a hint:
http://www.google.ca/search?q=New+Scientist+site%3 Aslashdot.org (7,180 occurrences)

On the "wireless" point...

[Mursk]

True, but the alternative would be to have a cable protruding from the user's head. If my choices were a) being totally blind; b) being able to see (to some degree) but having to worry about my vision being possibly interfered with; or c) being able to see (to some degree) but having to worry about getting an infection of or near my brain... I would probably pick b).

Re:On the "wireless" point...

[Original Replica]

True, but the alternative would be to have a cable protruding from the user's head

If the eye is already defunct, why not remove the eye and implant the camera? It could probably be incorperated into an artifical eye with out much problem. Circuits and cameras are already tiny and the power requirements can't be very high. (nerves deal in microvolts?) A wearable inductive recharger and you are good to go. Reattach the muscle and you could even look around. I can understand the external camera for the early R&D, but I hope the final product is fully implanted.

Re:On the "wireless" point...

[FleaPlus]

If the eye is already defunct, why not remove the eye and implant the camera? It could probably be incorperated into an artifical eye with out much problem. Circuits and cameras are already tiny and the power requirements can't be very high. (nerves deal in microvolts?) A wearable inductive recharger and you are good to go. Reattach the muscle and you could even look around. I can understand the external camera for the early R&D, but I hope the final product is fully implanted.

I imagine an external camera would be much easier to clean/upgrade. Also, it's possible that things like focusing the camera might generate some noise, which might be rather annoying if the camera were actually integrated with your skull.

Re:On the "wireless" point...

[Baron_Yam]

Actually, no inductive charger required... we have implantable fuel cells that create electricity using blood as fuel. Your major problem is weight and the optic nerve. Right now, they're putting something in your natural eye - stimulating what you have left to get the message through. Replacing the whole eye gets weight issues (I think it's referred to as orbital sag, but don't quote me), and directly connecting to the optic nerve is probably a nightmare - you can't exactly weld it. Still, I am looking forward to the day when a 40/20 cybernetic eye with terahertz, infrared, lowlight, ultraviolet, motion enhancement, data overlay, etc, etc, is available for elective implantation. Might even happen while I'm still young enough and foolish enough to have a pair stuck in my skull.

Re:On the "wireless" point...

[pipingguy]

...you are good to go

Aaaarrrggghhh! If I hear that again my head will explode! It's right up there with marketing-types saying, "absolutely" every 12.7 seconds. "Good to go" is a military way of communicating, let's leave it with the military, please. "Absolutely", as used by PR/ad people is a suck-up platitude designed to imply total agreement while they are usually smiling and lying (or at the very least, deflecting a question to somewhere they want you to go).

Re:On the "wireless" point...

[sjames]

If the eye is already defunct, why not remove the eye and implant the camera?

The top reason is that the device interfaces with the ganglion cells in the retina, so they need to keep it.

Bonus? More like curse.

[KingSkippus]

can they maybe pick up TV channels?... that would be a bonus.

Not when the MPAA finds out about it. Then they'll either force you to watch commercials or else send you C&D letters to make you stop seeing. Remember, bionic eyes clearly induce people to use them for watching copyright-violated material.

Canadians, who are a little smarter, will just assume that everyone's bionic eyes are used to watch infringing material and will charge a tax on bionic eye hardware and pay the industry a cut.

If we're lucky, maybe DVD Jon will still be around to save us from FairWatch and WatchForSure.

Hacked Eye

[Kazrael]

And yea, the last thing I need is another way to receive "Penis Enlargement" spam...

Arr

[Venim]

Oh wont anyone think of the pirates!

Re:Arr

[DarthTator]

I just can't believe there are 20 or so replies and no reference to Geordi LaForge yet! Must be a slow Friday evening.

Re:Arr

[Anonymous Coward]

But we are thinking about the pirates! We're incorporating digital recording capabilities, so you bring a person with a bionic eye to see a movie, and presto!, you have a cam version of that movie you can share through P2P.

Yeah, but does it

[jpellino]

make that "Thunn-nunnn-nuhnn-nuhhnn-nuhnn.." sound?

Re:Yeah, but does it

[QRDeNameland]

You mean this?

Re:Yeah, but does it

[Tablizer]

make that "Thunn-nunnn-nuhnn-nuhhnn-nuhnn.." sound?

No, it's Tfft-Tfft-Tfft-Tfft-Tfft..."

Actually about 2 years ago in a bionic topic, there was a big flamewar that broke out about how to spell it. And you thought the vi versus emacs fights were anal. While dudes with a real life are screwing babes on a Friday night in the back of their Chevy Camaro, we're here arguing about how to spell bionic sounds.

Mr. La Forge

[IronmanTriathlete]

I don't know about having this thing fixed on my face for the sole purpose of getting super-human vision. Mr. La Forge wore a simular for years, and I don't remember him getting any action. As a matter of fact, he later upgraded to have somewhat normal-looking eyes.

Re:Mr. La Forge

[The MAZZTer]

Read the summary again. The camera is small enough to fit on a pair of glasses... presumably it'll be made to blend in as much as possible.

Re:Mr. La Forge

[geekoid]

That's because the federation is xenophobic.

I am sure you can get some even if you wore La Forge Goggles.

Re:Mr. La Forge

[Anonymous Coward]

Except that was FIVE HUNDRED YEARS in the future. I'm not holding out any hope for a remedy for blindness, baldness, shortness, fatness, etc. in my lifetime.

not news

[Anonymous Coward]

I first heard about this over ten years ago, i've since been dreaming of the day when i can replace my inferior biological eye with a miniature camera that allows me to see in infra red, ultra violot, low light, maybe even some sort of Superman sub-clothes vision.

It looks like they are a bit closer now, so it might just happen in my lifespan.

Ads via wireless?

[tktk]

Hmm...wireless transmission of sight huh? Could ads and spam get transmitted that way?

Reminds me of a Neal Stephenson book, where some tiny, minor character killed himself since he got infected with some ad that played in his vision 24/7. It might have been about Korean roach motel, but it's been too long since I've read it.

Another approach

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.seeingwithsound.com/

No surgery and apparently it works. What you should see in front of you is converted to sound. Apparently it works great. I've heard a demo on the radio and it really sounds weird. It's different than sonar, which the blind use, in that light levels are converted to sound.

Re:Another approach

[BiggerIsBetter]

That is very very cool... Their "artificial synesthesia" caption seems rather apt.

a cellphone-sized computer in the wearer's pocket

[antron-jedi]

..anyone have linux running on it yet?

mnb Re:Extra features.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd personally opt for a HUD displaying the same stats found on the SIMS. This way, I know just what I need to be happy and successful.

I don't want to be a Nazi, but damn

I'd personally opt for a HUD displaying the same stats found on "The Sims".

would have been much easier to parse.

What could possibly go wrong :)

[nmos]

"This computer processes the image information and wirelessly transmits it to a tiny electronic receiver implanted in the wearer's head."

What could possibly go wrong :)

Sounds like a hacker's paradise

[Der Huhn Teufel]

We must find the frequencies this uses and take over them. Soon, all will see butts!

Tounge Eye

[sharperguy]

This reminds me of the tongue eye

It's a camera that was on the blind persons head, and it sends information down so a thing in you're mouth that sits on your tongue, and the pixels on the tongue device move up and down and eventually you can recognise it as images.

Re:Tounge Eye

[indigest]

You're referring to the BrainPort, which is manufactured by Wicab. IEEE Spectrum picked it as one of the "tech losers" of 2007 because it is too expensive ($5000-$6000) for what it is. Basically, a camera connected to a computer connected to a little motor that buzzes your tongue.

The sensing resolution on the tongue is way too low for processing visual data. A dog or cane would be just as useful for a blind person and they wouldn't end up attracting stares. Even with more research, Wicab is not going to be able to develop a tongue-based system that will let a user confidently cross the street. The invention mentioned in the article, however, taps directly into the ganglion cells, which are already optimized to pick up high resolution visual information. With further research, scientists could theoretically approach or even surpass the capabilities of normal human vision. Why not let a user see infrared and UV or have an extremely wide range of vision?

CHE-CHE-CHE...

[Anonymous Coward]

CHE-CHE-CHE-CHE-CHE... Go Steve!

For those too young to remember: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Six_Million_Dolla r_Man

(Six million dollars sounded like a lot of money back then)

Re:a cellphone-sized computer in the wearer's pock

[SeaFox]

Yes, but only with Evolution for a window manager.

Loonix

[streptocopter]

Next thing we'll see a linux distro that supports the new Human BrainTM architecture, I'm guessing it will be a even bigger pain than usual to make the video drivers work with this one.

Re:Loonix

[frogstar_robot]

Better that than Microsoft's "Secure Visual Path" built into your fucking head.

Uh-oh

[ryepnt]

This throws a whole new wrench in that abc show "Blind Justice"... If the show was still running this topic would be taken care of in sweeps.

Re:Uh-oh

[inertia187]

People in Soviet Russia, however, appear to be afflicted with amusing juxtapositions of the aforementioned situation.

Nice glasses

[wellingj]

Doesn't make jordy laforge look so silly now does it?
http://www.newscientisttech.com/data/images/ns/cms /dn11198/dn11198-1_600.jpg
http://www.newscientisttech.com/data/images/ns/cms /dn11198/dn11198-2_650.jpg

By the looks of things the signals going to be pretty small so I don't imagine it
would send much interference. But it might recieve a buch though if it has to be ulra
sensitive though. Oh well it's not like you need more than 30-40fps.

On the other hand what if you woke up, switched on your recievers so you could find
where your glasses were by looking at what was infront of them...wonder if they can
do this with car keys?

And one more idea, what about the aplication of remote sensing. You have the recievers
implanted into your head and use cameras around your house. Guess you would need to be
pretty paranoid to do that....

Re:Nice glasses

[TheRealFixer]

They should make it do 24fps. Then I could feel like I'm in my own movie all the time.

SeaLab 2021

[pizzach]

As long as it makes me feel like a koala bear crapped a rainbow in my head, I'm all for it.

Hallucinogenic Code?

[TranscendentalAnarch]

Once you've got a digital video stream transmitting to the brain it wouldn't be too hard to manipulate it to produce "hallucinations".

I wonder how the DEA/FDA would treat hallucinogenic code? /. Headline in 2015: "FractalStars.c now a Schedule I Controlled Code Block"

Re:Hallucinogenic Code?

[Dunbal]

Once you've got a digital video stream transmitting to the brain it wouldn't be too hard to manipulate it to produce "hallucinations".


      It wouldn't be to hard to copyright the video stream either. You just got a letter from the MPAA asking for $3000 because you took your bionic eye to the movies and illegaly copied one of their films...

Steve Mann

[Anonymous Coward]

Steve Mann wrote a textbook worth reading by anyone truly interested in the subject.

Old News...

[Mindragon]

Man, we've had this since the 1960's! Anyone watch Six Million Dollar Man? Even in the 80's we had this technology. It was called Terminator. Look at him, he's now Governor of California!

I, for one, welcome our Bionic Eye wearing overlords.

Interesting, maybe I'll get one

[Repugnant_Shit]

I'm blind in one eye, so this definitely interests me. I don't normally mind the reduced depth perception, but I think it would be nice to have a monocle version of this that I can use when doing delicate work or perhaps driving. I am required by law to have a side mirror on the passenger side, but I have to turn my head too far to be able to see it (bad eye = right eye). I wonder how the brain would handle seeing a near-infinite resolution image coming out of the organic eye, and a VGA/SVGA image from the implant.

Re:Interesting, maybe I'll get one

[Dunbal]

I wonder how the brain would handle seeing a near-infinite resolution image coming out of the organic eye, and a VGA/SVGA image from the implant.


      Probably in the same way that the brain handles everything else. Horribly to begin with, headaches, vertigo, vomiting. And a couple months later, you'll hardly notice it.

department

[PW2]

I have a screen-print (apparently not aging well) of some of my hobby software where Slashdot posted a similar story a number of years ago -- the point of this post is that they chose a better "department" back then: screen-print of some software

Star Trek Patent

[BeerCur]

Star Trek... I hear Gordie wants the eyedea all to himself.

Primitive

[deuterium]

It reads like some cybernetic breakthrough, but the device is nothing special. The breakthrough will be when surgical skills have advanced enough to actually attach thousands of individual sensor outputs to specific retinal nerves, along with refining the electrical exchange between the two in a manner that more closely approximates nature. The eye is more complex than its connection to the brain, also. There are 100 times as many photoreceptors as there are axons to the visual cortex, so there's a lot going on in the eye itself beyond acting as a receptor.

At present, this is more of a proof of concept than a cure for blindness.

Re:Primitive

[Anonymous Coward]

There are 100 times as many photoreceptors as there are axons to the visual cortex, so there's a lot going on in the eye itself beyond acting as a receptor. Yep. PNG/GZIP compression. Parity generation. Multiplexing.

The wonders of nature.

Wireless v Wired

[Dersaidin]

Wireless might be bad for the possibility of intercepting/pirate signals. Think of the alternative. A cable comming out? :/ Prone to infection, super ugly, it'd be like a wound that never closed... a head wound at that.

Re:Wireless v Wired

[RHSC]

you'd have to be a pretty big douchebag to hack a blind man's bionic eyes

More experiments on kittens

[Harmonious Botch]

Another kitten experiment involved raising them in environments with either only horizontal or only vertical lines. As adults, they simply could not see objects of the 'wrong' orientation. A cat who had been raised in a horizontal-only world could hop up on the seat of a chair, but would bump into the legs if he tried to walk under it.

Re:More experiments on kittens

[Dunbal]

A cat who had been raised in a horizontal-only world could hop up on the seat of a chair, but would bump into the legs if he tried to walk under it.


      Cool! Next time I have kittens I know what I'm going to do....(evil laugh) heeeere kitty kitty kitty

Re:More experiments on kittens

[Trillian_1138]

A cat who had been raised in a horizontal-only world could hop up on the seat of a chair, but would bump into the legs if he tried to walk under it.

I had heard that the kittens could indeed not see vertical lines (or horizontal, depending on the environment in which they were raised) but that as soon as they were put in normal situations they learned to compensate almost instantly by tilting their heads. The way I heard it, if you put kittens raised without horizontal input and tested them, they couldn't see horizontal lines but that if you put them in a normal environment with a bunch of normal kittens, you couldn't tell the difference because the ones with the vision impairment were compensating.

I never did see the study, and have no background in vision research, so I couldn't tell you which version is true, but I'd be willing to guess that the kittens learned to compensate by tilting their heads. It just seems unlikely they wouldn't learn how to compensate.

Trillian

PS - sorry for using the word 'compensate' so much. I guess I'm compensating for something.

Babylon 5

[whitehatlurker]

I'm more reminded of G'Kar and his detachable artificial eye from Babylon Five.

This Should Be Free

[RiotXIX]

This is fucking amazing, and huge. No, really.

I think for younger people (who have lost sight due to some premature condition or tragedy), this should be Government funded. I would respect a country's government who gave sight to it's citizens. No one should be blind.

Re:This Should Be Free

[ChrisMaple]

You pay for it. I'll respect you.

Links to better information

[Anonymous Coward]

More information and better reporting here:

http://medgadget.com/archives/2007/01/second_sight _me.html
and
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/02/16/retinal_bl indness_implant/
and
http://www.technologyreview.com/Biotech/18193/page 1/

Re:Bonus? More like curse.

[Dunbal]

FairWatch and WatchForSure

      Trusted Sight (TM).

Brain's AGP bus

[AnnuitCoeptis]

I am seriously disturbed, yes. None of the geek community shouted out loud: And how the heck you connect to the neural computer the brain is? Really, how you attach you VGA camera to the brain? I mean I presume brain doesn't have a DVI plug, so, do you somehow managed to plug-it to the 'neural wires'? What coding are you using? What resolution? What FPS? (lol) That is indeed amazing.. Also rises all kinds of dirty questions like=> can we plug or cast video stream to the brain??? we can send pictures directly there??

Re:Brain's AGP bus

[Anonymous Coward]

Isn't that what the optic nerve is for? The brain figures out what the signals mean with practice.

Re:Brain's AGP bus

[Torvaun]

Hah. Everyone else is busy making Six Million Dollar Man jokes, this guy goes straight to the Riddler in that Batman movie.

Re:Brain's AGP bus

[Turn-X Alphonse]

If your eyes are fucked I would assume the working nerve connectors could be used and it would send signals just like the real eye does.

Either way it is very easy to connect stuff to the body, it's just difficult to get it to react to the bodies electrical current

Can it shed a tear?

[bwalling]

I have to believe that having not seen in over 50 years, the first glimmer of anything visual would make you cry.

Colo(r)rs?

[Piranhaa]

Being partially color deficient, something like this would make it interesting to see colors in the real perspective. They have the technology to restore vision, hearing, and regrow organs, yet fixing simple color perspective has not been fixed? I guess it's not as important, but still would be nice to overcome eventually.

Re:Colo(r)rs?

[ChrisMaple]

As an experiment, you might try different colored filters in front of each eye. The effect won't be the same as regular color vision, but it might provide similar information that, with practice, could become automatically useful. On the other hand, you wouldn't want to use it all the time, who knows how it might mess up your vision system.

WPA or WEP?

[KalElOfJorEl]

Wait until someone figures out the structure of the wirelessly transmitted packets. Would it be weird if all of a sudden you're talking to a friend and some hax0r is transmitting his pr0n directly to your head?

I see an "I Spy" like possibility where Eddy Murphy sees Owen Wilson getting his ass beat in the middle of a boxing match.

Re:WPA or WEP?

[Quiet_Desperation]

Or even worse, the hacker cuts into your porn with some boring conversation.

eyes

[Anonymous Coward]

i want mine with one of those IR filters...not for seeing through clothes tho...

Re:eyes

[Tablizer]

i want mine with one of those IR filters...not for seeing through clothes tho...

If you do the clothes route, just avoid getting the bionic wanker also, otherwise you might kill a bystander.

Depends...

[Junta]

Might be a cheaper way to kinda check it out. Most color blind people are trichromatic like everyone else, but very weak in red or green perception. Most are weak-green (deutan anomalous), but I happen to be weak-red (protan anomalous). If weak, you may be able to get a rough idea how an image would appear by amplifying your weak portion of the spectrum in images. It's the inverse of the process they use to show normal color vision people what color-blind people probably see where they drop the various colors down. Anyway, for example my television offers a feature to do just that and is labeled something like 'color correction for color vision impaired'. I find it handy in certain video game puzzles that require color discrimination.

That said, 99% of the time I leave the feature off. Ultimately, 'normal' is a relative term, and normal/realistic looking to me is matching what I've been seeing for the past few decades. Cranking up the red looks as weird to me as it does to everyone else, though my weird may be closer to their normal, that isn't how it works.

I think those born with a sensory deficiency/lack are luckier than those who lose it later. Though color deficiency is far from a big deal, especially to me, those around me upon finding out say 'oh, sorry to hear, that must suck'. When I have heavy congestion that diminishes my hearing for a while, I always feel a little bit of dread at the thought of persistant, merely incomplete hearing loss, and have a significant amount of relieve the moment that happens when things clear enough to hear well again.

Does the wireless transmission have encryption?

[Type-E]

Does the wireless transmission have encryption? If not or if it was 128-bit WEP, I can easily see what he sees including the implanter's naked wife. It will take extra work if it was encrypted in WPA

What about people with detached retinas

[cwaldrip]

As a side effect of premature birth both of my son's retinas are detached. Is there any research into bypassing the retina and going straight for the optic nerve or to the vision centers of the brain?

Re:Nothing to *see* here

[Anonymous Coward]

Do the mods need a bionic eye to see the irony in the parent's post? I thought it was slightly clever.

Re: implant considered child abuse

[the_REAL_sam]

This will, of course, be considered child abuse when it is first done. In a century or two it will be considered abuse NOT to have it done for your kid.

I doubt both claims, and I think it's a grave mistake, building pessimism into your expectations of people.

If a blind child can see again, nobody's likely to claim it was child abuse that led there. (unless the chip posed some health risk, but they must have tested in on animals first, right?)

On the other hand, if sony develops a new graphics chip in 20 years and it's all the rave, there won't be any reason to blame the people who opt for good old fashioned God-given human-sense-based reality.

As for two HUNDRED years from now... well, I don't presume to know what will be happening so far into the future.

It's amazing stuff, though. It reminds me of System Shock I. I guess they've finally for-real bridged the gap between man and machine.

Or more like

[KKlaus]

Tapping a cane around forward to this.

Because the joke is... you can't... you can't see well... er... yeah sorry.

Re:Or more like

[abradsn]

The disease does not cause immediate blindness. I can still see fine, except in some situations that are fairly easy to avoid. I'm slowly going blind, and will be blind in about 30 years from now.

New Non-Optical Man-Machine Interface ?

[CalcuttaWala]

The technology that is described here can be used to design a new class of man-machine interfaces. Consider the traditional display. Digital data is first rendered as alpha-numeric-graphic icons and presented on a screen. Optical signals emanating from the screen reach the eye, get converted into electro-chemical signals that are processed by the nervous system.

The technology that is described here picks up optical signals, converts them into electrical signals (most probably digital), does some pre-processing and passes them directly to the ganglion cells / optic nerve in the eye. The user sees light and fuzzy objects and as the image processing technology improves ( as it inevitably would ) the resolution will improve dramatically.

My hypothesis is that the intermediate optical signals are irrelevent for the man-machine interface. The digital computer output is already digital. There is no need to render this information graphically ... instead let us pass it to the pre-processing software of the bionic eye ... and from then on into the ganglion.

And voila ! you would see your favourite slashdot.com website in your "minds" eye !

Am I being too futuristic ?

Re:New Non-Optical Man-Machine Interface ?

[frogstar_robot]

Years ago when Memory Stick first came out Sony had magazine ads showing a Memory Stick being inserted into a slot in the back of a guy's head. Methinks they were telegraphing the state of affairs they really want. No DRM built into my skull thank you.

Beta test?

[Fluffy_Kitten]

Where do I sign up?

Gaming Possibilities

[lowerlogic]

Once these get to a good resolution of several megapixels or so, if the implants came with a sort of socket (preferbly the back of the neck, matrix-style) which you could attach a wire between you and a computer just like a monitor, that would be really cool for playing computer games, especially if they could make the game take up your whole vision and not just the size of a monitor. But if Windows crashed, you wouldn't be able to stop looking at the BSOD, :(.

Re:Gaming Possibilities

[CalcuttaWala]

Absolutely ...
If we use (an upgraded version) of the current bionic eye technology to hook a the client ("viewer") software of any standard MMORPG style "game" or environment like SecondLife, then the border between what is "reality" and what is "virtual reality" becomes extremely blurred. Are You Real is a short movie that explores this possibility.
WYSIWYG could take on a different meaning altogether whether the definition of seeing can be expanded from the current "optical" version to the direct digital version.

Retinal implant

[cachimaster]

I'm starting to work in the field of artificial vision for mi thesis and the goal on our lab is to replicate Humayun's results. This is a retinal implant (inside your eye), in constrast to a cochlear one (inside your brain).
The cochear implants tends to fry you brain in the long run, but there are so many neurons that this takes a lot of time. The retinal chips are much more easy to build and implant, but the range of deseases cured are less, as not many blind people has a working retina or optic nerve.
SVGA resolution may be overkill for the eye, you have a zone of very high resolution in the center of your vision, and very low on the borders. And the distribution of the "pixels" is radial rather than rectangular.
And i think that a direct connection to the eye is a natural progression of computer interfaces, and a very useful one. I'm not blind and got a perfect vision but if I get the chance, I would get the implant when they become more advanced.

Ghost in the Shell Anyone? (Well, not yet anyways)

[soupcan58]

I know some will think of some stupidity for this, but this is one step closer to the optical implants that are shown within the films and series. Yes, I know, it's nowhere near that andvanced. But, discoveries like this could lead to something like that one day. Things are changing all the time.

Cadmium sulfide

[Weaselmancer]

Once this thing gets working well, use cadmium sulfide in the receptors and you'd be able to see in a wider visual band than normal eyes. Infrared and ultraviolet would become "visible". You would see heat signatures in the dark, and have nightvision among other things.

Re:Cadmium sulfide

[imsabbel]

Well, thats obvious. If it takes digital images, you can use _any_ imaging technique. ultrasound/heat imagin/auperzoom lenses... electron microscopes, telecopes, doppler radar. the possibilities are endless.

Wireless interfacing

[AndOne]

I'm sure many have wondered the same thing but.... what frequency band are the chips working on? I'm not a wireless guru but at the same time the profound amount of wireless interference in our world would have to be a problem for these....

On the same note I've read about short range wireless connections that are almost touching through the skin that are being considered for limb replacement so maybe it's the same tech? Of course it being late I can't remember the reference for that at the moment or how far along the trials are. At the same time this is a great approach because you don't have to worry about putting a lense system inside the ocular cavity since then you'd need to attach a number of muscular systems to the cameras which would be harder than figuring out the neural processing the eye does(from my understanding of these things) Nor do you have to have external cable ports which are just begging for trouble since they're open wounds in many ways even if they aren't bleeding.

Further side note... Dr. Boahen and his lab have done some work in modeling the behavior of the axon processing that occurs in the retina in silicon with additional processing layers in their silicon retina chips... and for the poster who wanted to know what all the extra photo receptors in the retina are for.. alot of that is for color detection and light adaptation. We actually perceive differences in signals.. so there are cells that fire more strongly in response to red but are dimmed when shown green in an antagonistic sort of effect and vice versa. Um... that's not exactly the best description in the world... Kandel Schwartz and Jessel "Principles of Neural Science" have several nice and easy to read chapters on the eyes for a nice quick intro. Probably not the most up to date work but eyes are pretty easy to understand since they're easy to get at. Brains are alot harder. To my understanding of what I've read(I'm not a neural scientist but I do study computer vision and biological inspiration is fun) most of the spatial and motion processing occurs in the Visual Cortex pathways more so than the eye. Please correct me if I'm mistaken but that's my understanding of things.

Gentlemen...

[Anonymous Coward]

We can rebuild him... we have the technology...

interesting...

[Anonymous Coward]

thats great,but can it run Linux?

Bene Tleilax anyone?

[Sartak]

How can an article about bionic eyes not have a single Tleilaxu joke?

News for nerds, pah.

Re:Bene Tleilax anyone?

[Shai-kun]

"News for nerds, pah." ...dishah?

Anyway, weren't the Ixians the ones with the bionic eyes and stuff?

Applications and hinderances

[Deltronica]

This is one of those innovations that lends so much to the imagination. 360 degree vision, while it would take a while to get used to, becomes possible; New types of vision (I hate to say it, but think "Predator") are in the foreseeable future. Other brain interfaces such as bionic controllers or inter-brain communication become more concrete than fantasy. However, a few questions come to mind concerning the ability of the brain to interpret this data. We are providing the optic nerve with a digital image transformed into analog neural impulses. The brain has complicated systems of filtering that allow us to recognize movement, depth, shading, object isolation and recognition, and many other things we as humans commonly take for granted. How well does the brain process this information compared to what it normally receives from the eye? Can it adapt to gain the same (maybe more advanced) filtering system if it is hindered at first? I think these are important questions to ask, but I'm sure they will be answered with time and research. In any case, it is very exciting to me that our ability to create hardware and software that emulate human biological functions is increasing. Does anyone know if this article is related to the recent optic nerve experiment where RAM was used as optical interfaces with nodes representing nerves that clustered as they were excited?

Operative word: "may"?

[smchris]

It seems like I've heard about lab trials like this for decades now and I'm really getting bored,

the new device _may_ [emphasis mine] be available commercially by 2009,

Guess I'll be impressed when I start seeing people in my neighborhood walking around with them.

Re:Implants for healthy people and additional eyes

[Rhsqueak]

Why stick to imitating the eye and its limited peripheral vision? Am I the only one thinking of an eye helmet?
I doubt you are, but all that more eyes will acomplish is to make it more difficult to see. The brain takes the seperate data from our two eyes and lays one image over the other. This gives us depth perception when both eyes are looking at the same thing but when they're not we have double vision. Try holding your hand 2" (or 5 cm if you prefer) directly in front of one eye and you'll see what I mean. Adding more eyes around the sides of the head, either through a helmet or implants, will make focusing more difficlut and add too much information.

I suppose what really troubles me about this idea is the fact that the parent proposes expanding one sense to do the job of another. Our ears are already omni-directional. Our ears tell us what's going on around us and that's how our brain deciedes where to look. I suppose the moral here is don't try to see more, just learn to listen better. /soapbox

Re:a cellphone-sized computer in the wearer's pock

[Romberg]

Apple sues for trademark infringement of this 'eye-Pod'.

Re:Bonus? More like curse.

[AgentPaper]

Directive 4: Any attempt to view copyrighted content with a bionic eye results in system shutdown.

What did you think would happen? It's not an eye, it's a product - and we can't very well have our products working against our best interests, can we?

Slightly Off-topic (why healthcare costs so much)

[Anonymous Coward]

[United States poster] I'm not trolling, but people wonder why healthcare costs are spiraling. We don't pay for it directly, (insurance just "covers it") so we don't ever think about someone else paying for the Ferrari of healthcare. I'm not saying it's bad for the GDP of healthcare to be spiraling upwards, just for society to quit complaining about it as new technology is developed, we should acknowledge the fact that we need to pay for it. I for one don't mind the thought of paying more and more for keeping my parents alive for their grandkids, and I am aware that advances in healthcare will cost a considerable amount. Just as heart cancer , (or whatever the latest leading cause of death) is bumped back, it will simply be replaced by the next one on the list - along with an accompanying increase in healthcare expense. Again I don't mind paying more, but people should just plan to start paying more for it and stop complaining when their percent increases to 20%, 30%, etc. (Think lasic, plastic surgeery, bionic eye etc.)

Or can TVs pick up their signals...

[Cappy Red]

or cell phones for that matter. Then I could interupt All My Circuits and think out loud about what a fat ass that neighbor lady has. ... though those could be anyone's thoughts.

I photographed one of these test subjects

[markman100]

You can see it here at nationalgeographic.com http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0606/featur e4/gallery5.html