Slashdot Mirror


How To Turn a Mini Maglite Into a Laser

Lucas123 writes "Using the laser from a DVD burner, this instructional video shows you how to create a hand-held laser that is powerful enough to light a match and pop a balloon. There's some soldering involved and the Maglite's bulb housing needs to be drilled out to fit the new laser diode, but with some basic skill, most people could do this. Just plain cool." Update: 07/09 12:23 GMT by KD : Warning, the device that results from following these instructions will blind you if you look into it.

605 comments

  1. Uhhh... by tonsofpcs · · Score: 5, Informative

    So basically you're not making a laser, you're just moving a laser from a drive into a flashlight case.

    1. Re:Uhhh... by Curien · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yes, thank you for repeating the article summary.

      --
      It's always a long day... 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
    2. Re:Uhhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They're making a hand-held laser and the keyword is "hand-held" not "laser".

    3. Re:Uhhh... by feepness · · Score: 3, Funny

      How funny, I was reading this post and happened to see this at exactly the same time:

      "Bureaucrat Conrad, you are technically correct. The best kind of correct."

    4. Re:Uhhh... by loganrapp · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yeah, but now you can put it on sharks!

    5. Re:Uhhh... by spootle · · Score: 2, Funny

      At least they're not moving it into a fleshlight case

    6. Re:Uhhh... by tsajeff · · Score: 2, Funny

      Now it makes sense. Maglite cases are waterproof - I always wondered how a laser would yield a warm meal for a shark or mutant sea bass.

    7. Re:Uhhh... by stanleypane · · Score: 1

      +4 insightful? WTF?

      The guy didn't even grok the comment, much less the article. Nowhere did anyone state that you were making a laser. It did state, quite clearly, that you'd be able to re-purpose a DVD laser to make a handheld laser.

    8. Re:Uhhh... by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

      So basically you're not making a laser, you're just moving a laser from a drive into a flashlight case.

      The Unabomber would have made a laser diode from scratch using items gathered from the forest in Montana, but I can't find his HOWTO on the web anywhere.

    9. Re:Uhhh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm.. looks interesting. But it's dangerous using a high energy output like that unprotected - just remember that..

      But - a totally different question. Does anyone knows something about the quality of the beam? I know you can use laser-pointer devices to make good quality holograms (I did that myself) with extreme depth of field (compared to a He-Ne laser). Should it be possible to use this laser for the same purpose? I mean - is it a single-point or multi-array laser?

      The wavelength is good for the kind of photographic material I use. With this kind of output power you can really use extreme short exposure times, witch reduces thermal and mechanical blurring of the hologram. It would therefore reduces the need to use extreme damping methods in the exposure environment...

      Still - if the output is that high the use of protective goggles are absolutely necessary. I have to find goggles that reduce the visibility of the beam, but don't shield it off totally (otherwise aligning of the beam through optical parts is almost impossible). Anyway - there is some research to to I guess ;-).

    10. Re:Uhhh... by markov_chain · · Score: 1

      Hand lasers! Dude, that's a huge advance. +5 to ground defenses, can make a big difference in early game.

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
  2. Sounds like fun. by jshriverWVU · · Score: 2, Funny

    Know what I'm doing this weekend :) now if only this could be modified for Laser tag

    1. Re:Sounds like fun. by heinousjay · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just tape balloons to people in strategic spots, I guess.

      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    2. Re:Sounds like fun. by aerthling · · Score: 2, Funny

      Or: last one to go blind wins.

    3. Re:Sounds like fun. by teaserX · · Score: 1

      This a good time for an active brainstorming of "what *else* could we do with this?"

      /me obligatory MUHUHUAHAHA!

      --
      We really need your help
      http://www.gofundme.com/help-sherry
    4. Re:Sounds like fun. by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 2, Funny

      Go blind? You masturbate while you're playing laser tag? More like laser fag! =)

      Actually, I was thinking that I can finally get laser eye surgery now, and ditch these glasses. I just need a really fast switch to pulse the laser and a mirror to see what I'm doing and I'm good to go. Plus, I'll be saving like $2000+ dollars.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    5. Re:Sounds like fun. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Excimer lasers are in the UV spectrum. I'll enjoy it if you curdle your vitreous humour.

    6. Re:Sounds like fun. by somersault · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a fun toy for terrorists. May as well just get everyone naked and seal up their body cavities before herding them onto the planes

      --
      which is totally what she said
    7. Re:Sounds like fun. by smooth+wombat · · Score: 1
      May as well just get everyone naked and seal up their body cavities before herding them onto the planes


      Don't worry. Very soon to get on a plane everyone will have to board like this.

      --
      We will bankrupt ourselves in the vain search for absolute security. -- Dwight D. Eisenhower
    8. Re:Sounds like fun. by hesiod · · Score: 1

      Oh darn, you shouldn't have told him that, because he was, like, so TOTALLY going to try it fer REALZ. I'm shur.

    9. Re:Sounds like fun. by marcansoft · · Score: 1
    10. Re:Sounds like fun. by Kagura · · Score: 1

      US military gets it free, and has for several years. I am going in within the next two weeks for both my final exam and the actual surgery.

  3. This is cool, but can it... by Seismologist · · Score: 3, Interesting

    actually ignite a match like that? I didn't know that 2 AA batteries could put out that much power in a laser beam... this is clearly a lot more powerful than your standard run-of-the-mill laser pointer used in presentations. I'm so tempted on doing this.

    --
    ~ In Trust, We Trust ~
    1. Re:This is cool, but can it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Hello. My name is 'Hank'. I am ordinary American boy. I have question please. How many of these does it take to bring down aircraft? Please answer soon. I must know before I go to daily prayers. Please reply to: "Hank American Boy". Also please supply quotes for 1000 DVD drives and 2000 batteries. Ready to pay in dinar. Ooops. I mean dollar. Hahaha. I make funny. Dollar. Not dinar.

    2. Re:This is cool, but can it... by MrNaz · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hello Hank. DVD players and batteries can be purchased more cheaply and discretely in volume from China. Please direct your questions there. You will also find that China's energy policies make it easier to pay in dinar if you wish. You will also find that America is about to put DVDs on the restricted export list along with PS2s and common encryption.

      If you are caught taking a portable DVD player across a national border you will be arrested and tried as a terrorist. It is unclear whether this will apply to CD players as well, but better throw that out too, just to be on the safe side. BlueRay players have been classified as WMDs, so if you're a foreign government, you better stay friendly with the US if you want to watch The Matrix in high definition without being declared a rogue state and invaded.

      Yours truly,
      John.

      --
      I hate printers.
    3. Re:This is cool, but can it... by Dimentox · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Parent was funny... Why did you mod it down? Mod both up.

      --
      string sig = llGetSig("dimentox"); llSay(0,sig);
    4. Re:This is cool, but can it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It could be fake. On Metacafe, people are paid for the views their videos get, so there's a lot of incentive...

    5. Re:This is cool, but can it... by Walt+Dismal · · Score: 1

      I agree. Parent was funny, not a troll, and the above comment was not offtopic either. Somebody got an itchy trigger finger, I guess. So, these two blind men walk into a bar. The bartender says "what'll you have?" The first blind guy says "Anything but another laser pointer, frankly..."

    6. Re:This is cool, but can it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I recently put 4 aa batteries into a flashlight wrong so that they were trying to
      charge each other. I left the flashlight set with the switch on (fortunately on a
      cement patio) After about 15 minutes the flashlight and batteries were a pile of
      slag (including partially melting the "metal" battery casing). So yes they
      provide plenty of power.

  4. Great... by sRev · · Score: 5, Funny

    Now when I go to the movies, instead of worrying about Brad Pitt having a red dot on his face, I have to worry about the screen igniting. Good times.

    1. Re:Great... by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You know they're gonna solve that before we have kids.

      Tiny Violin: Poor kids never know the simple pleasure of the laser :(

    2. Re:Great... by RuBLed · · Score: 3, Funny

      You know they're gonna solve that before we have kids.


      At /. it's like saying "You've got a better chance winning the lottery though..."
    3. Re:Great... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Considering the quality of today's movies, I'd say that most would definitly benefit from such a cool effect.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Great... by Speare · · Score: 1

      Just a reminder that it is NOT a crime to yell "Fire" in a crowded movie theater if there actually IS a fire in a crowded movie theater. :)

      --
      [ .sig file not found ]
    5. Re:Great... by CensorshipDonkey · · Score: 1

      The screen is reflective. For 220 mW to ignite anything, it needs to be pretty dark. I work with a few hundred mW in my lab all day, and you can safely put your hand in a 300 mW+ beam in the red. Sometimes I block the beams with business cards, however, and if it hits the black ink instead of white paper it can burn a hole in the card.

    6. Re:Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you suggesting that I should be more worried about Denzel Washington being hit with dot than Brad Pitt?

  5. Careful with this thing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    In the words of Rainier Wolfcastle:

    My eyes! The goggles do nothing!

  6. yeah baby by sudo · · Score: 4, Funny

    So where did I put those frikin sharks?

    1. Re:yeah baby by flayzernax · · Score: 1

      I'm in favor of dolphins with lasers myself.

    2. Re:yeah baby by hosecoat · · Score: 1

      sharks are on the endangered species list, it will take months to clear up the red tape. how bout sea bass?

    3. Re:yeah baby by RuBLed · · Score: 1

      Are they ill-tempered?

    4. Re:yeah baby by hosecoat · · Score: 1

      Absolutely.

  7. Laser Housing by MrLeap · · Score: 0

    Is that necessary? Is it just a metal tube or does it serve a more substantial purpose.

    1. Re:Laser Housing by djupedal · · Score: 2, Funny

      "Is that necessary? Is it just a metal tube or does it serve a more substantial purpose."

      Yes.

      Now do you understand why they don't allow optical media writers in your carry-ons?

      Next week...how to turn a laser into a repeating rifle - all part of our DIY Firearms Convergence Series, here on the 'Defending the Homefront' Channel. Brought to you by 'Ahmed's Security Stuff' - at ASS, we pick up on the first ring!

    2. Re:Laser Housing by martin_henry · · Score: 0

      Now do you understand why they don't allow optical media writers in your carry-ons?
      No, I don't. I carried my cd-burning laptop on a plane 2 months ago. Where's the problem?
      --
      www.purevolume.com/martyd
    3. Re:Laser Housing by Curien · · Score: 1

      WOOOOOOOOSH!!!

      --
      It's always a long day... 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
    4. Re:Laser Housing by Nalk · · Score: 1

      Now do you understand why they don't allow optical media writers in your carry-ons?

      They don't?

      What about laptops? Presentation mice?

      Heck, I even brought two external DVD-RW drives from Portland to Boston and back in my carry-on, in addition to two laptops!

    5. Re:Laser Housing by Slugster · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Re: Is the metal housing really necessary? ....Yes, for the most part.

      I tried this some time back, and it didn't quite work, but I'll relate what I know anyway:

      1. There's TWO laser diodes in a DVD burner--remove them both out carefully, preserving as much of the leads already-soldered-on as you can! The leads of the laser diodes are very short (maybe 2mm) and only about a half-millimeter apart, it's damn tough to get the longer leads soldered back on if you cut them off, and there's no need to cut them off and then attempt to solder them back on anyway.

      2. Inside the DVD burner you will find TWO laser diodes, with mirrors that feed them both into the same beam. Each will be glued inside its own heatsink, a piece of metal that may be a very odd shape, and then these are attached to a bigger copper plate. To tell them apart, just test them--try applying 1.5V power to both diodes one at a time, the CD one is IR and won't appear to do anything. The DVD one will light up visible red. (if all the lenses are removed from them at this point, you cannot burn your eyes out, that's in the next step...)

      3. The bare laser diodes don't put out a laser "beam", they just create a pinpoint light (that's safe to look at!). To get the beam, you must mount a fisheye lens with its concave side set very close to the diode, almost touching it.

      4. The laser housing is a metal tube with a fisheye lense set in it. The laser diode will get warm with 1.5V on it, and will get too hot to hold in ~30 seconds with 3V on it. The laser housing serves partly as a heatsink, and also as a way to hold the lens without melting (the DVD-drive optics will have a fisheye lense, but those optics are usually set into little plastic frames, and they may melt in this use).

      ....Mine didn't work because I could not find a way to get the laser diode out of the original steel heatsink it came in. It was glued inside a hole about 6mm deep in a odd-shaped steel heatsink. You could maybe grind the heatsink away a bit at a time with a Dremel & cutoff wheel, but laser diodes are sensitive to heat, so you cant let the laser get too hot. I tried using mine still in its heatsink with other optics (telescope objectives and whatnot), and with those set in front of it, it would melt a garbage bag a little but wouldn't do much else.

      IF you manage to get one out and do this, don't run it for more than ~20 seconds at a time without letting it cool down for a minute or so. The laser diode will work with 3V batteries hooked straight to it, but you're definitely not going to get that 100,000 hour lifetime. You'd be lucky to get 1000 hours. The DVD laser output power is typically around 210mW, and more than 150mW is enough to burn stuff (the CD laser won't burn stuff because it's only around 40-50mW max).
      ~

    6. Re:Laser Housing by Alioth · · Score: 1

      It has a collimating lens. Laser diodes produce highly divergent beams which aren't much use to anyone - so any laser diode to be useful will need a lens (either to focus the beam on a disk, or to produce a collimated beam for something like a laser pointer).

    7. Re:Laser Housing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait, so it's NOT a laser, just a concentrated light source?

      What a ripoff!

    8. Re:Laser Housing by markov_chain · · Score: 1

      Folks, it's a trap! Don't test this by looking into lens-less laser diodes!

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
    9. Re:Laser Housing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh this is so cool! I really must look into it....

  8. Shark by wizardguy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ok, so where do I get the shark ? and where is the manual on how to mount it on the shark ?

    1. Re:Shark by Vombatus · · Score: 4, Funny
      and where is the manual on how to mount it on the shark ?

      Mounting the laser could be a slight problem if the shark is conscious

      --
      This sig is intentionally blank
    2. Re:Shark by 8ball629 · · Score: 1

      Man.. this comment is funnier than the parent lol... someone mod this guy up!

    3. Re:Shark by Pogdranaut · · Score: 5, Funny

      and where is the manual on how to mount it on the shark ? mount -t lamniformesh /dev/laser shark
    4. Re:Shark by Xemu · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Mounting the laser could be a slight problem if the shark is conscious

      Just turn the shark upside down before mounting, that makes it go into tonic immobility for about 20 minutes.

      --
      Tell your friends about xenu.net
    5. Re:Shark by NeuroManson · · Score: 4, Funny

      Ew! Ick! TMI man, TMI.

      --
      Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
    6. Re:Shark by zebs · · Score: 3, Funny

      Turning the shark upside down could be a slight problem if the shark in conscious

    7. Re:Shark by _pruegel_ · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just turn the shark upside down before turning it upside down, that makes it go into tonic immobility for about 20 minutes.

    8. Re:Shark by zebs · · Score: 1

      Then it'll be the right (normal) way up, does that then cancel the tonic immobility?

    9. Re:Shark by harry666t · · Score: 3, Funny

      hmm...

      $ file /dev/laser /dev/laser: symbolic link to '/dev/dvdrw1'

    10. Re:Shark by Big+Grizzle · · Score: 1

      LOL....Surely you have to run it as root user.

    11. Re:Shark by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends on whether the turns are clockwise or anti. When it all cancels out, sharkie wakes up and swims off. Until then, you're fine.

    12. Re:Shark by antibryce · · Score: 1

      don't forget the noatime option. Don't want your sharks to be sluggish.

    13. Re:Shark by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

      I hope your trying to be funny. Since I have seen sharks in the wild, at the water's surface upside down sunning themselves. Why they did this, I have no clue. But it was very hot, no wind, very calm no waves to speak of. They were belly up wiggling around. I was thinking of going in for a swim until I saw the sharks. 10 feet of water is over one's head so how different is 500 feet of water. Seeing those sharks cured me of wanting to jump in.

    14. Re:Shark by GodfatherofSoul · · Score: 1

      If only most sharks would be so obliging. LOL I've been watching Shark Week too.

      --
      I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
    15. Re:Shark by owlstead · · Score: 1

      The fortune database contains a good piece of advice about catching sharks:

              So Richard and I decided to try to catch [the small shark].
      With a great deal of strategy and effort and shouting, we managed to
      maneuver the shark, over the course of about a half-hour, to a sort of
      corner of the lagoon, so that it had no way to escape other than to
      flop up onto the land and evolve. Richard and I were inching toward
      it, sort of crouched over, when all of a sudden it turned around and --
      I can still remember the sensation I felt at that moment, primarily in
      the armpit area -- headed right straight toward us.
              Many people would have panicked at this point. But Richard and
      I were not "many people." We were experienced waders, and we kept our
      heads. We did exactly what the textbook says you should do when you're
      unarmed and a shark that is nearly two feet long turns on you in water
      up to your lower calves: We sprinted I would say 600 yards in the
      opposite direction, using a sprinting style such that the bottoms of
      our feet never once went below the surface of the water. We ran all
      the way to the far shore, and if we had been in a Warner Brothers
      cartoon we would have run right INTO the beach, and you would have seen
      these two mounds of sand racing across the island until they bonked
      into trees and coconuts fell onto their heads.
                      -- Dave Barry, "The Wonders of Sharks on TV"

    16. Re:Shark by CopaceticOpus · · Score: 1

      TMI man, TMI. Ew! Ick!

  9. Exactly what we need... by OakLEE · · Score: 1, Troll

    Now instead of just hitting the neighbor's cat with a sling shot, Jimmy can set it on fire.

    --
    The sun beams down on a brand new day, No more welfare tax to pay, Unsightly slums gone up in flashing light...
  10. To repeat an old warning by stox · · Score: 5, Funny

    "Do not look into Laser with remaining eye!"

    --
    "To those who are overly cautious, everything is impossible. "
    1. Re:To repeat an old warning by LarsG · · Score: 4, Informative

      With a 245mW laser, that should be modded informative, not funny. It is strong enough that it can cause permanent eye damage from a reflection, long before the blink reflex kicks in.

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
    2. Re:To repeat an old warning by JonathanR · · Score: 1

      Don't point it at pilots either

    3. Re:To repeat an old warning by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      It's a good idea to buy a pair of these before starting this project.

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    4. Re:To repeat an old warning by John+Whorfin · · Score: 1

      Ok, no shit. It lights matches and pops balloons for God's sake.

      Pins pop balloons too. Where are all the warnings to not poke pins in my eyes?

    5. Re:To repeat an old warning by LarsG · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The difference is that most people know that pins and eyes don't mix. Numbtards don't run around with consumer grade pins and stick them in peoples eyes, but they don't think twice about fooling around with laser pointers.

      The legal power limit on laser pointers is set so that they eye's natural blink reflex will protect the retina from permanent damage. This thing is 50 * the limit, and will cause permanent damage at less than 1/100 second. Blink reflex is at about 1/10 second. Even partial reflection off something like a milk glass might cause permanent blind spots (and you are unlikely to realize it at the time, the brain interpolates). An instructable like this without a warning to use laser safety glasses and treat it like you would a .22 gun is an accident waiting to happen.

      Also, if you use a diode rated at say 200mW@2.5V it will output a lot more if run at 3V. And someone is bound to make one with a CD-burner diode; while they are lower powered, they output IR so you won't see where you're pointing it and it won't trigger the blink reflex.

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
  11. This is why I read Slashdot by olyar · · Score: 5, Funny
    Windows bashing? Witty comments? Duped stories? Comments about duped stories and how often they get posted? Soviet Russia and Overlord jokes? Left-leaning political commentary?

    Nope. None of those things.

    Articles about making lasers? Yes! Yes! It can light things on fire too?

    Excuse me. I think I may have just wet my pants.

    --
    Custom, hands-free Linux installs. Instalinux
    1. Re:This is why I read Slashdot by Lane.exe · · Score: 5, Funny

      I for one welcome our laser-wielding Soviet Russian overlords with a Beowulf cluster of goggles that do nothing against Natalie Portman covered in hot grits making the first post on a duped story about the Cowboy Neal option for polls.

      --
      IAALS.
    2. Re:This is why I read Slashdot by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Funny

      overlords running Linux on a Beowulf cluster...

      At least be complete, you insensitive clod.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:This is why I read Slashdot by CDarklock · · Score: 2, Funny

      What else would you be running on a Beowulf cluster? OSX?

      --
      Microsoft cheerleader, blue flag waving, you got a problem with that?
    4. Re:This is why I read Slashdot by bjackson1 · · Score: 1

      overlords running Linux on a Beowulf cluster... Just think of a Beowulf cluster of those....
    5. Re:This is why I read Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Forgot blending...

    6. Re:This is why I read Slashdot by kcbnac · · Score: 1

      Vista!

      *ducks and runs*

    7. Re:This is why I read Slashdot by insertwackynamehere · · Score: 1

      Wow you list all those Slashdot memes and are still the first person in this whole thread who didn't mention sharks with laser beams

    8. Re:This is why I read Slashdot by Aranwe+Haldaloke · · Score: 1

      ... in Japan. Or in Korea, if they're old people.

  12. This makes me sad. by mdenham · · Score: 2, Interesting

    DVD players use a red laser; presumably Blu-Ray players use a blue laser (though why you're cannibalizing the operative piece of a $1k+ piece of... oh, wait, maybe you already converted your PS3 into a grill)... but there isn't anything that uses a green laser that's readily obtainable, is there?

    1. Re:This makes me sad. by Architect_sasyr · · Score: 2, Funny

      I for one welcome our new mag-lite-bearing-sith-overlords... you jedi scum can leave... these aren't the lasers your looking for...

      Hey look... I just butchered a movie script...

      --
      Me failed English...
      FreeBSD over Linux. If my comments seem odd, this may explain...
    2. Re:This makes me sad. by Gordonjcp · · Score: 2, Funny

      You can get green lasers very cheaply on eBay. Oddly enough I was looking for one last night, and spotted some for less than £15 GB (or about $150 US).

    3. Re:This makes me sad. by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 1

      I haven't looked at exchange rates lately. Has the dollar gotten that weak? Ten bucks to the pound?

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    4. Re:This makes me sad. by Curien · · Score: 5, Informative

      It depends. In nickels (4.5g), the dollar is about 5 bucks per pound. If you use quarters (5.67g), you get about 20 bucks.

      --
      It's always a long day... 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
    5. Re:This makes me sad. by cyberanth · · Score: 1

      www.megalaser.com

    6. Re:This makes me sad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no thats a fantasy. its about $2 to the GBP

    7. Re:This makes me sad. by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      Hey look... I just butchered a movie script...

      George Lucas was way ahead of you...

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    8. Re:This makes me sad. by Opportunist · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Umm... is it me or is the metal contained in those coins worth more than the coin when used as currency?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:This makes me sad. by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Yes, the rising price of metals has made certain coinage worth more than its face value.

      Of course, governments are quick to place restrictions on the export of these coins, and ban their meltdown for metal.

    10. Re:This makes me sad. by MrNaz · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Re: your sig
      You just got in there, so don't be so cocky.

      --
      I hate printers.
    11. Re:This makes me sad. by nelsonal · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It is for nickels, but not dimes, quarters, or those dollar coins. Pennies were right on the edge you can get up to date values from http://www.coinflation.com./ Pre 1982 pennies (copper)are now worth almost $0.03 these days. Oh and the GBP is worth about $2.

      --
      Degaussing scares the bad magnetism out of the monitor and fills it with good karma.
    12. Re:This makes me sad. by syrinx · · Score: 1

      In nickels (4.5g), the dollar is about 5 bucks per pound. If you use quarters (5.67g), you get about 20 bucks.

      I love that this is modded 'informative'.

      --
      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    13. Re:This makes me sad. by Curien · · Score: 1

      I know, it's ridiculous. I was hoping for "funny", but when I saw "Score: 5 Informative" on my comment list, I could hardly believe it.

      --
      It's always a long day... 86400 doesn't fit into a short.
    14. Re:This makes me sad. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there isn't anything that uses a green laser that's readily obtainable, is there?

      Only if you don't count these...

    15. Re:This makes me sad. by mdenham · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sorry for being unclear. I was wondering if there's any readily available green laser diodes that are of approximately the same power as a DVD or Blu-Ray player's.

      Oh well, there go my dreams for making a true-color OMG MY EYES ARE BURNING display, I guess.

    16. Re:This makes me sad. by Architect_sasyr · · Score: 1

      I can see how it would be thought of as cocky, but it was never intended to be. If you were watching at the time (and I mean looking for it) from the time I registered to the time we broke the 1,000,000 mark was rather large. Sometime around the end of this time /. started to get a lot of registrations happening and quickly - I believe /. has breached the 1,100,000 mark already? Less than 1/2 the time it took to get to the million) and the postings that I have come across for any UID that size have been of the sort of person that if I were to meet them I would expect to be around 13 to 15 years old (this is obviously by no means accurate, but is my personal view of the situation). There are exceptions, and I have seen users who were previously in your range of UID (~700000) whom have somehow lost control of their account registered in the million+ range, as well as someone who claims to have been surfing longer than myself and provides some very good comments.

      So my regards for pointing that out, but I will leave the signature as is for the time being as it is more of a blanket rule than anything else. When I find an intelligent comment from ANY user I will mod it up, and if I feel the need to comment then I will do so.

      Cheers
      My $0.02 AU

      --
      Me failed English...
      FreeBSD over Linux. If my comments seem odd, this may explain...
  13. what could possibly go wrong? by commodoresloat · · Score: 1

    It's all fun and games until someone loses an eye... or at least an eyebrow!

    Seriously though I know the perfect use for this -- long distance fly swatter!

    1. Re:what could possibly go wrong? by darthflo · · Score: 1

      I haven't used a ~250 mW DVD laser yet, but using my ~100 mW laser, killing a fly took quite a long time. It started smoking, too.

  14. Re:Just plain cool ??? Just plain stupid by sqrt(2) · · Score: 1

    Two words: personal responsibility

    --
    If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
  15. Obligatory Star Wars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I feel a great disturbance in the internets. Like a thousand LG drives cried out in pain and were suddenly silenced. ...

    Join the dark side, hack your mini-mag. Seriously sweet.

  16. Good plan by xrayspx · · Score: 3, Funny

    There's going to be a lot of blind hackers in the next couple of weeks. If you're smart, you'll figure out how to wrangle this as workmans comp before you build the thing.

    1. Re:Good plan by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'll call it natural selection and applied darwinism.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Good plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not going to kill them or stop them from reproducing.

    3. Re:Good plan by nmos · · Score: 1

      I'll call it natural selection and applied darwinism.

      Applied darwinism gone horibly wrong maybe. The problem is this doesn't kill, it just gives the victim a "dangerous" looking eye patch which is sure to attract the opposite sex and increase the odds of reproduction.

    4. Re:Good plan by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yeah, sure, you get a lotta chicks when you're blind.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  17. Dude... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not build a laser diode into cell phones?

    That would give me two good reasons to beat the crap out of those people when the movie sucks.

  18. Re:Just plain cool ??? Just plain stupid by flayzernax · · Score: 1

    Because, Slashdot is FREE SPEECH, free speech necessarily is harmful to kids, little geek sisters, and old people crossing the road at a slow pace by default. Otherwise it wouldn't be free. Plus its O.K. if laser shark armies blind us! I for one welcome our new Laser Shark Overlords! LSO's FTW!!!

  19. Don't look into the laser with your one good eye. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You forgot a very old stereotypical slashdot joke.

  20. Cool isn't the word... by Slashamatic · · Score: 3, Informative

    The problem isn't the current draw - it is the heat. The big laser pointers tend to ensure there is better thermal coupling to the case so the waste heat is removed. With this, it will tend to heat up the module until pssst... and your laser is dead. Should be ok for less than a minute or so.

  21. now all we need are sharks! by doktorjayd · · Score: 0


    and of course a means of mounting the frickin lasers on them.

  22. CD burner? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Would an old CD burner laser be powerful enough to amount to enough to pop balloons? I have plenty of old CD burners, but all my 2 DVD burners in computers.

    1. Re:CD burner? by LarsG · · Score: 1

      Yeah. But CD burner lasers are infrared so they won't look as cool (and you won't know that you are aiming it at your eye until you hear the boiling sound).

      And be very very careful with these lasers, they are strong enough to cause permanent eye damage and blindness even at very short exposure times.

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
    2. Re:CD burner? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously people 5mw cheap laser pointer from 1 mile away = staring into a 100 watt light bulb. From close up it can easily damage your vision and with anything that can start a fire well you'd be lucky if an unintentional significant specular reflection doesn't hurt you or someone else.

      Not that you would care but anything above 5mw is most likely illegal in the states without a license. On another note anyone who is stupid enough to play with UV lasers deserves everything they get.

    3. Re:CD burner? by Hanners1979 · · Score: 1

      Can someone tell me what this post says? I think I burned my eye.

    4. Re:CD burner? by cp.tar · · Score: 1

      Yeah. But CD burner lasers are infrared so they won't look as cool (and you won't know that you are aiming it at your eye until you hear the boiling sound).

      And be very very careful with these lasers, they are strong enough to cause permanent eye damage and blindness even at very short exposure times.

      And now all we need is one asshole who'll set out to blind people with an infrared laser.

      You don't know what he's done until you're already blind, and then it's too late... And good luck finding him, too.

      --
      Ignore this signature. By order.
    5. Re:CD burner? by LarsG · · Score: 1

      Professional asswipes would use UV lasers. If you miss the target's eyes you give him a heightened chance of skin cancer instead.

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
  23. Nice timing by sqrt(2) · · Score: 1

    I just found a beat up mini mag with some old stuff of mine. Damn thing still worked too, their durability is legendary. I've also got a burner sitting here not being used. It's not a 16x and the article specifically mentions that, would other speed burners still work? Otherwise I'm going to buy a 16x just to rip out the diode. I don't own a soldering iron (I know, I know turn in my geek card and gun). Guess I'm going to radioshack this weekend. This should be pretty damn fun.

    --
    If you build it, nerds will come. Soylentnews.org
    1. Re:Nice timing by hankwang · · Score: 5, Informative

      would other speed burners still work?

      Yes. But the main problem is that you need some way to limit the electric current through the diode. Laser diodes behave a bit like LEDs, electrically: below a threshold (2.5 V or so) there is little current and they don't do much, and above that threshold, every 0.1 V you add will increase the current and light output enormously. Too much current and the diode will die in a matter of seconds. Apparently the laser diode he used was just right at 3 V from two penlites, although I doubt that he had a calibrated laser power meter to measure whether the output power matched the nominal power rating for the diode. The simplest way to limit the current is to use a higher voltage and a series resistor. Something else is that the laser assembly in different optical writers sometimes doesn't have the collimating lens attached to the laser diode itself: without lens a laser diode produces a very divergent beam.

      Now for safety: I work with fairly high-power lasers (up to 25 W) for a living and consider a hand-held 250 mW laser in the hands of someone without appropriate training in laser safety hugely irresponsible. According to the IEC60825 standard on laser safety, 200 mW will lead to permament eye damage within 1 microsecond (!) of exposure. The reason laser pointers are restricted to 1 or 5 mW (depending on the country) is that for those powers, eye damage will occur after 0.3 seconds, which is about the time for the blinking reflex to close your eyes in the event of accidental exposure. Unexpected reflections from things like glass can be up to 10% of the beam power - 20 mW (eye damage in 10 microseconds).

    2. Re:Nice timing by Alioth · · Score: 3, Informative

      In all probability, the batteries will probably limit the current all by themselves - AA batteries typically are fairly high impedance sources and just can't deliver an awful lot of current. I have high power LEDs without much in the way of current limiting because the impedance of the battery (plus the Rds(on) of the MOSFET that turns them on) is such that the current is a little less than nominal (300mA rather than 315mA, with an absolute max. of 550mA).

    3. Re:Nice timing by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That's what goggles are for. Choosing the right ones is the key, though, depending on the wavelength of the laser.

      (you all know what quote just begs to be in the reply, right?)

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Nice timing by bentcd · · Score: 2, Funny

      (you all know what quote just begs to be in the reply, right?) No, no, no, it's not begging the reply, it's raising the reply, and . . . wait . . . ummm . . .
      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    5. Re:Nice timing by andersa · · Score: 1

      Personally I'd say the danger is somewhat exagerated. I have looked into red keyring laser pointers plenty of times with no ill effects. A seconds exposure from that kind of a laser will not harm you in any way. These lasers are typically around 1mW or less.

      I wouldn't try it with my He-Ne laser though. I don't remember the exact rating on that. I am sure it is plenty dangerous though.

    6. Re:Nice timing by E++99 · · Score: 1

      It's not a 16x and the article specifically mentions that, would other speed burners still work?

      Not if you want to burn stuff. (and who doesn't?) Slower burners will have successively lower-powered diodes. I found for CD burners it's roughly speed x 5 = power in mW. I'm not sure that it's also a roughly proportional relationship in DVD burners, but it would be a reasonable guess.
      If so, you have roughly
      16x - 200mW
      8x - 100mW
      4x - 50mW
      etc
    7. Re:Nice timing by hankwang · · Score: 2, Informative

      Personally I'd say the danger is somewhat exagerated. I have looked into red keyring laser pointers plenty of times with no ill effects. A seconds exposure from that kind of a laser will not harm you in any way.

      So did I, to be honest, although never several seconds. But: at 1 mW (visible light), the MPE (maximum permissible exposure) is about 1 second. The MPE represents the largest exposure which under worst-case circumstances does not lead to eye injury for 90% of the population. Worst case means that the eye and the laser source are stationary over the given exposure time, and that the eye lens is focused such that the laser light is concentrated onto the smallest possible spot size on the retina. If the eye lens is a bit out of focus, resulting in a blurry spot, you have some extra margin. I think the MPE values take into account that the eye is never completely motionless.

    8. Re:Nice timing by tttonyyy · · Score: 1

      According to the IEC60825 standard on laser safety, 200 mW will lead to permament eye damage within 1 microsecond (!) of exposure. The reason laser pointers are restricted to 1 or 5 mW (depending on the country) is that for those powers, eye damage will occur after 0.3 seconds, which is about the time for the blinking reflex to close your eyes in the event of accidental exposure. Unexpected reflections from things like glass can be up to 10% of the beam power - 20 mW (eye damage in 10 microseconds). (Emphasis mine)

      I don't think it scales like that (or even linearly). Otherwise by your reasoning, 2mW => 100us for eye damage and not 300ms.

      Surely its more likely to be nearer 100ms than 100us?

      Solving a linear equation through the datapoints of 300m@5mW, 100us@200mW gives 277ms@20mW (but also gives 308ms@0mW and -8ms@205mW, so it can't be linear!)

      But yeah, either way, reflections would be bad news, just perhaps not quite as bad as you suggest. :)
      --
      biopowered.co.uk - catalytically cracking triglycerides for home automotive use since 2008. Just say no to big oil!
    9. Re:Nice timing by tttonyyy · · Score: 1

      D'oh, I meant:

      Solving a linear equation through the datapoints of 300ms@5mW, 1us@200mW gives 277ms@20mW (but also gives 308ms@0mW and -8ms@205mW, so it can't be linear!)

      That'll teach me not to preview. :(

      --
      biopowered.co.uk - catalytically cracking triglycerides for home automotive use since 2008. Just say no to big oil!
    10. Re:Nice timing by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      Do you know what the wavelength is for the diode use in the article?

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    11. Re:Nice timing by andersa · · Score: 1

      This makes sence.

    12. Re:Nice timing by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Damage occurs that quickly? Hmm... most people tell me I couldn't possibly have this little blind spot in my right eye, where I got caught by a supermarket scanning laser. Little do they know...

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    13. Re:Nice timing by hankwang · · Score: 1

      I don't think it scales like that (or even linearly).

      I just put the MPE numbers on Wikipedia. I assumed that the pupil is 0.5 cm2, so for 500 mW/cm2 versus 50 mW/cm2 you can read from the plots that these are the MPEs for 1 and 10 microseconds. Actually, between 1 ns and 10 microseconds, the MPE is 50 nJ regardless of the duration. For shorter times, nonlinear effects kick in, such as two-photon absorption, while for longer exposure times, heat diffusion in the retina will limit the temperature increase.

    14. Re:Nice timing by hankwang · · Score: 1

      Damage occurs that quickly? Hmm... most people tell me I couldn't possibly have this little blind spot in my right eye, where I got caught by a supermarket scanning laser.

      See my other post. The damage time scales very nonlinearly with the power of the laser. A barcode reader is no more than a few mW and because the beam is moving all the time you wouldn't be exposed to more than a couple of microseconds at a time anyway. Unless of course you managed to stop the rotating mirrors without shutting down the laser.

    15. Re:Nice timing by Reziac · · Score: 1

      [goes off, reads]

      My incident happened when supermarket lasers were newfangled tech. I wonder if they used a stronger laser back then?? my exposure was maybe half a second, tops.

      Interesting link about photic sneeze reflex -- every Norwegian I know (including my mom's whole family) has this to a mild degree (one or two sneezes worth, never more). I wonder if it's a protective adaptation, given that in northern climates, the most common "sudden bright light" is sunlight reflecting off snow. Tho I've found as little as a 4W nightlight can trigger nasal drip.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    16. Re:Nice timing by bensch128 · · Score: 1

      But yeah, either way, reflections would be bad news, just perhaps not quite as bad as you suggest. :)

      Why don't you try it out and tell us. Assuming you can see the keyboard afterwards.... hahah

      ben

  24. Young Skywalker by infonography · · Score: 5, Funny

    I see you have constructed a new lightsaber. Your skills are complete, indeed you are powerful as the emperor has foreseen. - Darth Vader

    --
    Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
    1. Re:Young Skywalker by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      Ok

      I'm going to burn some karma on the most stupid thing to whinge about EVER, sorry but I just have to, this isn't an attack.

      This is slashdot, full of sci-fi nerds, techies, geeks, dorks etc while the quote is cool, signing off who actually said it, kinda ruins it, dunno why but it does!

      Several people have done it lately, if you're gonna make a pop culture reference, the whole comedy of it, to a point is recognising it.

    2. Re:Young Skywalker by infonography · · Score: 1

      I name the quote because if I didn't I would be screamed at for not doing so. For the exact reason you just mentioned. Those SciFi Nerds can be very Anal about these things. Look at the Kirk vs Picard flamewars. I got that one in a tech interview a while back.

      Of course I had an answer;

      John Sheridan.

      --
      Sorry about the writing. Robot fingers, you know? Cliff Steele in DOOM PATROL #23
    3. Re:Young Skywalker by ross.w · · Score: 1

      I see your Schwartz is as big as mine...

      --
      If my call is important, why am I talking to a recording?
  25. Soddering? by Trogre · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is that a strange way of pronouncing 'soldering'?

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    1. Re:Soddering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is that a strange way of pronouncing 'soldering'? Maybe it's what you get if you combine an electronics class with the Goatse guy.
    2. Re:Soddering? by heinousjay · · Score: 1
      --
      Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
    3. Re:Soddering? by tom17 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      It's the yank way of saying it. Very very odd.

    4. Re:Soddering? by billgates · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's an American thing. The rest of the English speaking world uses 'soldering'.

    5. Re:Soddering? by jsse · · Score: 1

      It's an American thing. The rest of the English speaking world uses 'soldering'. And only an American would mod this as 'Informative' instead of 'Funny'.
    6. Re:Soddering? by NatasRevol · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Otherwise, us Yanks are thinking 'soldiering?' WTF is he talking about..

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    7. Re:Soddering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No it's not. We spell it soldering as well. It's just someone who doesn't know how to spell.

    8. Re:Soddering? by XorNand · · Score: 1

      How does everyone else pronounce it?

      --
      Entrepreneur : (noun), French for "unemployed"
    9. Re:Soddering? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the yank way of saying it. Very very odd. Yeah, whatever. "Cupboard", "Colonel", "Lieutenant", "Cholmondeley"... I tell you, the English language has been a regular cock-up since about 1430 AD.
    10. Re:Soddering? by ady1 · · Score: 1

      Apparently he could See the wrong spellings due to obvious reasons.

  26. Sure by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    Laser pointers (green ones at least) aren't limited in power because of their batteries, they are limited in power because of safety. Because of the concentrated nature of the beam, you can do some real damage. As such all pointers are limited to 5mW. For red, that's not a big deal as the diode caps out around there anyhow. However green diode lasers can be easily made to go more.

    1. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So what your saying if one really wanted to do this mod for heat and life then one should use a green diode and not a red diode because it will last longer and put out more heat. Is that correct? Is there a color diode even better than greene. Is there anything else I should at when buying these. Also what if I move up to like one of their Double-D sized batteries flashlight unit instead of the two Double-A battery model they used in the demo.

    2. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A shorter wavelength laser will have more energy. Ultraviolet would be the best. Unless you modify the laser module's circuit, using bigger batteries would not make any difference to the output other than the fact that they will last longer before going flat.

    3. Re:Sure by dido · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So you could do some real interesting things with a Blu-ray diode then...

      --
      Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
    4. Re:Sure by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 5, Informative

      Green lasers can put out more energy because of their design in general. Now from the demo, it looks like this red diode is more powerful than the ones normally used in laser pointers, not sure on its power. I don't know what the maximum is, but it is in the 100s of mW. I don't know about the orange or blue diodes, haven't really looked at them. The problem is that they are rather expensive so I don't think you'll want to buy them. D batteries have the same voltage as A batteries, just more storage capacity. So using those will make it last longer. As a practical matter, the voltage you feed it needs to be whatever it was designed to take, so if 3 volts is what is called for, do not go over or under that, you'll probably just screw up your stuff.

      One thing to note though is that green laser are more complicated. There isn't actually a single diode that does green, rather it is an IR light that's generated and then frequency doubled to make green. In fact one would probably get more energy per square mm by simply using the IR output. Of course that is even more dangerous since you can't see IR and thus could be lasing your eyes and not know it.

      Before you do this, note three things:

      1) You can buy lasers over 5mW commercially. Just search Google for it, it isn't illegal or anything.

      2) To own and operate any laser over 5mW requires a license. You are responsible for getting it from the FDA.

      3) Messing with high power lasers (and yes over 5mW is high power in the laser world) is rather dangerous. That's why there's the limits. If you have a 100+mW laser, which is around what you'd need to light a match, even the reflected light could damage your vision permanently if you hit your eye. Given that you don't seem to know much bout lasers, best not to fuck around with this. Consider that the sun provides about 1000 watts per square meter to the earth, and that looking right at it will damage your sight in a few minutes if you aren't protected. That works out to about 1mW per square mm. So take a laser, who's dot is only around a square mm or two, then consider its power. Yes, it really is brighter than the sun. When you are talking about some of these high power 3B lasers, they are MANY times brighter than the sun. Don't play with powerful lasers until you learn about them.

    5. Re:Sure by Alioth · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't know about the orange or blue diodes, haven't really looked at them.


      Please remember not to look at them with your remaining eye :-)
    6. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2) To own and operate any laser over 5mW requires a license. You are responsible for getting it from the FDA The who? FDA? Not bothered about them at all.
      Laws vary by jurisdiction. But more importantly, application varies by ability to enforce.

      Consider that the sun provides about 1000 watts per square meter to the earth, and that looking right at it will damage your sight in a few minutes if you aren't protected. How about those 'sun staring' people who are looking directly at it for an hour or two a day? Ok, granted, they are clearly deranged, but their tans look fantastic.
    7. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How quickly could this burn out a security camera or camcorder?

    8. Re:Sure by Opportunist · · Score: 1, Funny

      It's all fun and game 'til someone loses an eye.

      Then it gets awesome.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:Sure by LiquidCoooled · · Score: 1

      I agree about the better batteries lasting longer.

      I have modded an old nokia phone to power my laser pointer.
      The current phone charger plugs into the phone and charges the battery as normal, but now my laser lasts practically forever (I was fed up with pissing away money on button batteries for 5 minutes).

      I charged the nokia once and its so far lasted long enough for the cats to be bored without going flat.

      --
      liqbase :: faster than paper
    10. Re:Sure by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      A DVD laser is in the order of 220mW

    11. Re:Sure by Capt+James+McCarthy · · Score: 1

      "2) To own and operate any laser over 5mW requires a license. You are responsible for getting it from the FDA."

      Huh? The FDA governs lasers? I thought they put license plates on cows.

      --
      There are no loopholes. It's either legal or it's not.
    12. Re:Sure by dbitter1 · · Score: 1

      It's all fun and game 'til someone loses an eye.

      Then it gets awesome.

      No, then it is fun and game [sic] without depth perception.

      --
      For us carnivores, "Sucking the marrow out of life" isn't a transcendentalist philosophy but a practical instruction.
    13. Re:Sure by Hijacked+Public · · Score: 1

      Thinkgeek is way too high dollar.

      Specs on DealExtreme's stuff is usually grossly overstated, but it is cheap.

      --
      "Sacrifice for the good of The State" - The State
    14. Re:Sure by jon_anderson_ca · · Score: 2, Funny

      Do not meddle in the affairs of lasers, for you are soft and absorptive.

    15. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the most important question of the day.

    16. Re:Sure by Dimentox · · Score: 1

      This product is regulated by the FDA and is 100% legal in the U.S. The laser meets all safety requirements and is in compliance with 21 CFR1040.10 and 1040.11 of the FDA regulations (in case you were wondering). Thats from the product.. so yes the FDA governs it.

      --
      string sig = llGetSig("dimentox"); llSay(0,sig);
    17. Re:Sure by Sandor+at+the+Zoo · · Score: 1

      You can buy lasers over 5mW commercially

      I'm surprised that nobody has yet posted a link to Wicked Lasers. I haven't bought anything from them, but I've been tempted.

      I do have a green laser I picked up on eBay from some HK reseller a couple of years ago for $30-something. It's very cool, but the cats are less interested in it than in a red laser for some reason. I suspect that the wavelength of the green laser corresponds to something less bug-like when viewed by cats' eyes.

      Note: a quick google while writing this indicates that cats aren't really colorblind, but they cannot distinguish shades of red.

    18. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't mind knowing this myself, could this damage the optics in a speed camera system?

      (we have fixed permenant speed cameras as revenue raising devices in my country, fucking ridiculous)

    19. Re:Sure by E++99 · · Score: 1

      I do have a green laser I picked up on eBay from some HK reseller a couple of years ago for $30-something.

      Caveat Emptor -- when buying a "green laser" from ebay, you might want to verify that "green" is referring to the laser light, rather than the laser itself.
    20. Re:Sure by E++99 · · Score: 1

      These instructions say to get a 16x DVD burner, which will be around a 200mW red laser. Anything slower will be less powerful. You could also build an IR laser (although potentially more dangerous and less fun) CD burners. A 52x CD burner will have about a 150mW IR laser; slower burners being proportionately less powerful.

    21. Re:Sure by E++99 · · Score: 1

      Well, apparently they're also responsible for putting the frickin lasers on the frickin cows.

      I wonder if you could put fricken lasers on fricken chickens.

      If you put 50 fricken lasers on the heads of 50 fricken chickens, and put them all together in a fricken checken pen, and watched to see who survived, and how much smoke was produced, would that be illegal? And would it soon replace dog fights and conventional cock fights? And would PETA object?

      No I'm not high, quarter to 10 is just a bit early fo rme.

    22. Re:Sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also remember that matches contain ground glass and those particles of glass can reflect back to you. It would not be a good idea to even look at the match you're trying to light.

    23. Re:Sure by smellsofbikes · · Score: 3, Informative

      As I said in another post, DVD burning uses lasers rated for over 200 mW. You can buy a DVD burner for under $40 and strip out the laser, or you can often buy replacement/repair carriages for burners on ebay for even less.

      I haven't yet seen a straight green laser diode -- mine are all frequency doubled. However, many new green LED's are created using silicon nitride, essentially being blue lasers that emit at a longer wavelength, and it's not clear to me why they couldn't do the same thing with a blue diode.

      Lasing your eyes with IR sucks, but not as bad as with visible, because the front of your eye is mostly (*mostly*) opaque to IR so you'll just fry your cornea, which can be replaced. Visible will go through the eye optics system, get even more focussed, and fry holes in your retina, which is not repairable. I've worked with people who have gotten big blasts of UV, IR, and green, and only the people who got hit with green had blind spots in their vision. The others had to wear glasses or have lens/cornea replacements, but they had reasonable vision despite that.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    24. Re:Sure by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      Green lasers are limited in output by optical damage to the coatings. They use an IR laser, driving a YAG crystal, driving a frequency doubling crystal, which is the limiting point. The IR is often in the 200 mW range, like these visible DVD lasers, but you only get a couple mW out of the frequency doubler because A: it's a lossy, nonlinear process that's heavily thermally dependent and cheap laser pointers don't tempcontrol their YAGs or frequency doublers, and B: the output coupler coating on the frequency doubler crystals is only rated to a certain power and if you exceed that you'll cook it. If you want high-power green laser diodes, you have to replace the output crystal. (Yes, I've tried, and have some trashed KTP crystals to show for it.)

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    25. Re:Sure by Orange+Crush · · Score: 1

      Huh? The FDA governs lasers?

      Certainly for medical purposes, but I can't find any info on the FDA's responsibility for lasers outside of food and medicine.

    26. Re:Sure by marcansoft · · Score: 1

      There is no such thing as a green laser diode. Green lasers use a powerful infrared diode (like the one in this article, but infrared) pumped into an Nd:YVO4 crystal which resonates together with a KTP crystal to produce green light.

      Color has nothing to do with heating power - that's what the mW rating is for, and the wavelength doesn't change the amount of power it puts out. However, different materials absorb different wavelengths, so it depends on *what* you want to burn. But that's obvious (same reason why wearing a white t-shirt on sunny days keeps you cooler). If you have an object that absorbs every visible wavelength (i.e. it is mostly black), then the wavelength of the laser doesn't change power.

      However, the eye is much more sensitive to green, power-wise, than red. That is why green lasers look a lot brighter. In fact, I'd argue they are safer at the same power levels than red - they look so bright you will quickly turn away and treat them with more respect than a crappy deep-red pointer that looks like nothing but actually puts out the same amount of power.

      The reason green pointers can be "overclocked" more than red pointers is because the crystals themselves tend to withstand quite a bit of abuse, and the pump diode is already a high-power diode which tends not to have too much trouble going further. The cheap 5mW diodes in red pointers will die quickly if you try to push them further. Green pointers are very inefficient.

    27. Re:Sure by Reziac · · Score: 1

      "2) To own and operate any laser over 5mW requires a license. You are responsible for getting it from the FDA."

      I believe TFA said these lasers are 235mW. Now what??

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  27. BluRay by VariableGHz · · Score: 5, Funny

    Think of (all?) the people who now have a good use for their BluRay players. ;P

    1. Re:BluRay by revengebomber · · Score: 1

      That's actually a very good point -- wouldn't the laser diode in a blu-ray or hd-dvd burner be a formidable weapon in the wrong hands? In all seriousness, if a DVD laser can light a match...

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    2. Re:BluRay by RobertLTux · · Score: 1

      http://www.wickedlasers.com/lasers/SONAR_Blu_ray_L aser-35-24.html some geeks will say been there done that BURNED THE T-SHIRT

      --
      Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
  28. bad f**kin idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Makes me think what the cause of this one was...
    Qantas pilot dazzled by laser

  29. Um, *excuse* me!? by edunbar93 · · Score: 5, Informative

    What part of "This product contains a Class 2 laser. Do not power on without enclosure" did you not understand? This has the potential for causing serious bodily harm, including but not limited to permanent blindness!

    --
    "No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
    1. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Suicyco · · Score: 0

      That is why it is so awesome. Totally awesome.

    2. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Ohreally_factor · · Score: 5, Funny

      You're not the boss of me. I hate you! I hate you! God, my family sucks.

      Oh, sorry. I was channeling a 14 year old emo girl for a minute.

      --
      It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
    3. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 2, Informative

      If the laser is just Class 2, then unmodified there is little risk. You can't find a laser pointer less than Class 3R for the most part. Supposing the video is genuine, it looks like the diode is being badly over driven and thus is now Class 3B or even a Class 4 which certainly is a concern.

    4. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      One man's warning label is another man's invitation...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It could certainly be fake... on metacafe (where the video is hosted), you get money for views, so people will do pretty much anything.

    6. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Quiet Meg!

    7. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      This has the potential for causing serious bodily harm, including but not limited to permanent blindness!


      So does a blowtorch. A gun has the potential to kill you. It's pretty obvious that a laser that can light a match is seriously dangerous if miss-used. I'm not sure what you're getting at here.

      --
      AccountKiller
    8. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Ihlosi · · Score: 2, Insightful
      It's pretty obvious that a laser that can light a match is seriously dangerous if miss-used.

      No, it's not. If you don't know about the properties of laser light (monochromatic, coherent, low divergence) and what happens when laser light passes through a lens, you will seriously underestimate how dangerous this stuff is. This is a few steps above using the sun and a magnifying glass.

    9. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Okay, you're killing me here. I'm gonna tell you a secret - a magnifying glass is a lens. They can be pretty big, too. The things I've seen done with a magnifying glass are almost unbelievable. Let's be serious here. The biggest risk this thing poses is if you shine it at someone's eye. Put it against your skin, and it's no worse than a magnifying glass. And yes, if you shine it in your eyes, all kinds of bad things will happen, from blindness to other issues. Look up stories about lasers and spy cameras for some ideas of how debilitating this can be. But it's still no more dangerous than model rocketry.

      When did the world get so nervous about doing anything that involved the least amount of risk?

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    10. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Das+Modell · · Score: 1

      And what about people who intentionally point it at somebody's eyes? No reason to be nervous about that?

    11. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      And what about people who intentionally point it at somebody's eyes? No reason to be nervous about that?

      What about people who intentionally point blowtorches at somebody's eyes? I honestly don't understand why this laser is somehow in some special category of dangerous stuff.

      --
      AccountKiller
    12. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by KlomDark · · Score: 1

      You sniveling pussy. Stop whining.

    13. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Das+Modell · · Score: 1

      I believe a blowtorch requires a fuel source, is rather bulky and has a short range. People deranged enough to carry a blowtorch in order to blind people are probably non-existent.

      A laser pointer is small and can be used from a distance. The perpetrator no doubt believes that he can get away with it, and may not understand or care about the damage that a laser can do to somebody's eyes.

    14. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      No more so than the fact that trees make pointy sticks, rocks hurt when they whack into your head, or kids tend to find every sharp corner the old-fashioned way. So should we burn all the trees, turn all the rocks into powder, and round off every corner in the world? Or should we just provide education to the risks involved and penalize the people who are too stupid to realize that something is dangerous?

      Honestly, how is this more dangerous than a car? It's certainly not as useful for the average person, but we've dealt with this in different realms before. I stand by the model rocket comparison. Sure, they're dangerous if used improperly, and shouldn't be used by people under a certain age without supervision, but can also be a valuable learning and entertainment experience.

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    15. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by BlueCollarCamel · · Score: 1

      Because you can usually see the person with a blow torch coming at you.

      --
      1&1 - Cheap domain and web hosting.
    16. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Das+Modell · · Score: 1

      A laser powerful enough to destroy a human eye should not be available to just any person who wants one.

    17. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      This is cheap, small, easily portable, easily concealable, very effective, and usable at a distance.

      You know there's a difference, but you refuse to admit it because it makes it easier for you to dismiss the complaints about the dissemination of the information.

    18. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by PerlDudeXL · · Score: 1

      Yes, this toy is a bit too dangerous and the lack of a clear warning before
      or at the end of the video is grossly negligent.

      However, warning labels to not prevent certain people from doing or building
      dangerous things.

    19. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Vellmont · · Score: 1


      A laser pointer is small and can be used from a distance.

      A sling shot is small and can be used from a distance as well. If well aimed, you could blind someone. Distance weapons aren't new.

      I'm sure you'll bring up some small flaw in how this is DIFFERENT than a slingshot. Obviously. Just try to understand that the class of "dangerous stuff someone could use to harm someone else, without fear of being caught" is quite old and we've managed to deal with it so far. This isn't any different.

      --
      AccountKiller
    20. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by mdielmann · · Score: 1

      Perhaps not, but you're gonna have a hard time regulating it since they're used everywhere. We may just have to accept that there are stupid people out there who do stupid things and deal with them as they come along. Besides, which do you think is more dangerous in most settings - a knife or a laser pointer? Yet we sell knives everywhere...

      --
      Sure I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
    21. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by errxn · · Score: 1

      I was channeling a 14 year old emo girl for a minute.

      So, they're calling it "channeling" now?

      --
      In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
    22. Re:Um, *excuse* me!? by Das+Modell · · Score: 1

      A sling shot requires a lot of skill, you have to be closer and your odds of getting away are smaller.

      Nobody has ever tried to hit me with a sling shot or a blow torch, but people have pointed lasers at my eyes, and I'm not the only one.

  30. Dumbass in the comments by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 5, Informative
    There is a guy in the comments section of the blog who is giving out dangerous advice:

    That thing might blind you if you stare at it but second or 2 blast won't do any damage. It took a bit to pop the balloon and your eyes are probably tougher than a balloon. That is so completely false.

    If you can pop a balloon with it, it is probably in the 100mw range which is enough to do permanent eye damage in 1/100th of a second. That's faster than you can blink. You won't go blind instantly, you'll just burn out a bunch of optic nerves, producing a 'hole' in your vision. Chances are, your brain will correct for the hole and you won't even know its there, unless an object ends up right at that point in your field of view, at which point it will 'magically' disappear.
    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    1. Re:Dumbass in the comments by LarsG · · Score: 4, Informative

      The laser used in the article is said to be 245mW, so with regards to eye safety it would not be an exaggeration to say 'this is a weapon, not a toy'.

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
    2. Re:Dumbass in the comments by caluml · · Score: 1

      at which point it will 'magically' disappear.

      Wow man, that sounds so coooool! I'm going to get one of these...!

    3. Re:Dumbass in the comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It also takes a bit of prodding to pop a balloon with a pin. Obviously, that means it's perfectly safe to stick a pin in your eyeballs, since they must be tougher than a balloon.

      Gotta love non-sequiturs.

    4. Re:Dumbass in the comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > unless an object ends up right at that point in your field of view, at which point it will 'magically' disappear.
      http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/bb/blindspot1.html another reason why the object could "disappear".

    5. Re:Dumbass in the comments by ArcadeX · · Score: 1

      and your eyes are probably tougher than a balloon well obviously, how could a simple piece of dense rubber compete with non-shielded organic cells... I don't think this guy even understands the concept of a sunburn...
      --
      An I.T. motto in the hands of an idiot is a dangerous thing...
    6. Re:Dumbass in the comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You won't go blind instantly, you'll just burn out a bunch of optic nerves, producing a 'hole' in your vision Oh SWEET! I'm SO burning a cross-air into my retina!
    7. Re:Dumbass in the comments by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      W at exa tly do you mean by "holes in yo r vis on"?

    8. Re:Dumbass in the comments by grassy_knoll · · Score: 1

      'this is a weapon, not a toy'.


      Sure. Make me want to make one even more. ;)
    9. Re:Dumbass in the comments by Merk · · Score: 1

      You're right about it being hugely dangerous, just a little point about what you're burning out. You have one optic nerve that attaches to the eyeball at a certain point (where you naturally have a small blind spot). What you're burning out is part of your retina, killing the rod and cone cells that translate light into nerve impulses which are then sent to the optic nerve.

      If you happen to be dumb enough to actually look at the laser light, you'll probably burn out your fovea (center of vision) where you have a lot of cones, the cells that allow you to see in high-resolution, necessary for things like reading.

      As far as I can recall, you can't regrow these cells either, so once you burn out your eye with a laser, you're permanently blinded in that region.

    10. Re:Dumbass in the comments by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      Anytime anything is called a 'weapon', the following must come into play:

      A well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of thr people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

      Otherwise, who wants to end up as soap, pillowfill and lampshades?

      If one thinks that everyone is a criminal, in his mind he makes his country a prison camp.

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
  31. Redundant? by mwvdlee · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Parent is the first post I see, it has a topical observation yet it's marked "redundant"... by people who don't want to read ANY comment?

    --
    Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
  32. Dr Evil by AlanCramer · · Score: 0

    "Now I can finally have sharks with a frikkin lazer attached to its frikkin head."

  33. Mods, wake up! by T0t0r0_fan · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sure, cool and simple it is, but do you want to start placing bets on how many people are seriously going to think before pointing this at a mirror? This is the kind of article you'd expect to have a page of safety instructions in big flashing letters before ANY instructions. Free speech it is, but the author AND editor need to have some fscking sense of responsibility, too.

    1. Re:Mods, wake up! by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No. Decidedly, no. Information has never and will never cause harm. It cannot. I do agree that some information, like certain pictures, can cause bodily harm because they induce the reproduction of your last meal, but you're free to ignore said information and keep your ham and eggs with you.

      If someone is dumb enough to use the information and blinds himself, he's the only one to blame for it. That something like this is harmful should be obvious. If it's not, this is due to the person having not enough information on the subject to see the problem.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Mods, wake up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agreed.

    3. Re:Mods, wake up! by Von+Helmet · · Score: 1

      That something like this is harmful should be obvious.

      Obvious to who? You're on slashdot, dude. You're preaching to the choir. We have science degrees and understand what a mW is and all the rest of it. People in general do not. There should be some sort of warning to let people know what they are creating and what it is capable of.

      I'd love to know how you plan to get everyone to determine the relative dangers of everything they do, starting from the most basic of scientific precepts, which the vast bulk of people don't understand or care about.

    4. Re:Mods, wake up! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, like I said. When they get hurt, it's due to a lack of information, not too much information. They don't understand what mW means? Look it up. They don't understand the meaning? Take a lightbulb and see what lots of Watts are compared to few.

      In earlier days, people simply didn't try what they didn't understand, simply because they knew that it could be kinda harmful if they did. Chemicals that require tons of paperwork today were readily available, less than half a century ago. But people used them according to the specs and didn't try out what they didn't understand, knowing that it does mean "could be dangerous" when there's a skull painted onto the tin.

      Today, in our nanny state, we don't expect anything harmful to be in reach. And that's the key problem here. We expect things to be "sane and safe" and go ballistic should we still be able to get hurt when we use it in ways that a normal thinking person would consider insane. Why should it be the manufacturer's responsibility if you're too dumb to handle his tool? He told you to use it in a very specific way. You decided to use it differently. You, and only you, are liable for the damage. Not the person who gave it to you under the premise that you would use it as prescribed.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:Mods, wake up! by MightyYar · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Information can most certainly cause harm when it is incomplete. This video makes it look like harmless fun - hey, kids, take apart your DVD burner and pop a balloon! Not one mention that you should be wearing goggles, that even partial reflections can blind you or others. Using this thing anywhere except a windowless room where everyone inside the room is in protective eyewear is irresponsible and dangerous.

      Teaching someone how to make a tool without also showing them how to use it properly is irresponsible, especially if you neglect to even tell the person that the tool is very dangerous. I think you are right in that anyone stupid enough to look into the beam deserves to be blinded, but this thing will also blind anyone who's exposure to the beam is less than 1 ms - shorter than the blinking reflex. Even a 10% reflection is more powerful than a some laser pointers. Common sense may keep you from staring into it, but it might not occur to you just how dangerous it is.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    6. Re:Mods, wake up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe, if you don't know enough about something to realize it may seriously injure you, you shouldn't be messing around with it in the first place.

    7. Re:Mods, wake up! by ukemike · · Score: 1

      What about when they hurt someone else?

      --
      -- QED
    8. Re:Mods, wake up! by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      I don't really disagree with your philosophy of personal responsibility... but in this case, simply operating the thing in a place with windows creates a hazard to OTHERS - not just the user. Their ignorance can hurt other people - which does absolutely nothing to effectively thin the gene pool in our favor :)

      Because this is /. I should make it clear that I mean the clear things that keep the world out, not MS Windows.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    9. Re:Mods, wake up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course you're right, information is value free and man's history of creating and controlling information, often to prevent harm, has been misguided. Maybe when the 12yo kid down the street blinds YOU with one of these things, you'll see it a little differently.

    10. Re:Mods, wake up! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Still their doing. Not the information.

      I'm not saying people should use information and act on it without thinking. I know how to make explosives out of Aspirin, or MDMA out of a few other substances that can be easily obtained. I don't act on this knowledge. Why? Because I also know that the outcome has a good chance of being unfavorable. For me, or for others. It's called responsibility.

      That some people are irresponsible is unfortunate, but should not be blamed on the information itself. Information cannot compell you to do something, it is neither god nor devil that whispers to you in a sweet voice "use me". I do not believe in the limitation of knowledge for the sake of "safety". You cannot create a fully "safe" environment. It's like with guns: If having information is a crime, criminals are the only ones who have it.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re:Mods, wake up! by E++99 · · Score: 1

      No. Decidedly, no. Information has never and will never cause harm. It cannot. I do agree that some information, like certain pictures, can cause bodily harm because they induce the reproduction of your last meal, but you're free to ignore said information and keep your ham and eggs with you.

      What about information about the future, which if known could cause a paradox which would tear apart the very fabric of spacetime? Also, "reproduction"... I do not think it means what you think it means.
    12. Re:Mods, wake up! by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I'll ponder the effects of knowing future when it becomes possible.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  34. Now if someone could make... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...an instruction how to make these fancy-looking protective laser goggles for that wavelength for less than 200 USD, I would be very happy.

  35. This stuff is fun. . . by dhalgren · · Score: 3, Informative

    . . .but read and understand the safety FAQ first:

    http://www.laserfaq.org/sam/lasersaf.htm#safssl2

    Torben

    1. Re:This stuff is fun. . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds familiar....

      Before we use any power tools, let's take a moment to talk about shop safety. Be sure to read, understand, and follow all the safety rules that come with your power tools. Knowing how to use your power tools properly will greatly reduce the risk of personal injury. And remember this: there is no more important safety rule than to wear these -- safety glasses.

    2. Re:This stuff is fun. . . by Alioth · · Score: 1
      From the FAQ:

      The reflected beam should be considered as dangerous as the primary beam. (Again, I have seen a 1,000 watt CO2 laser blast a hole through a piece of steel, so imagine what it would do to your eye !)

      Forget what it'd do to your eye... you wouldn't have a head left to not stare into the beam with the remaining one!

      But seriously, I'd no more play with the laser diode in the story than I'd play with a .22 target pistol - really, this laser flashlight is every bit as dangerous when you consider a reflection could quite easily be blinding.

    3. Re:This stuff is fun. . . by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      Worse than a .22 pistol - you would have to be seriously unlucky to be hit by a ricochet from a .22 and do yourself any permanent damage. Whereas with a 245mW laser, dangerously bright reflections will bounce all over the place. The eye is naturally drawn to bright shiny moving things (which is why diode laser pointers are such a successful product and have totally eclipsed masked flashlights for the purpose of presentation pointers).

      So you have a much better chance of doing permanent eye damage to yourself and anyone else around.

      The engineer in me loves how cool this is. The part of me that treasures my eyesight is morbidly afraid and I would treat this device with more respect than a loaded firearm, simply because the ricochet is so unpredictable. Alas, many people are used to messing about with 1 and 5mW laser pointers with relative impunity, and in the hands of someone with that pre-built attitude, it's only a matter of time before someone is permanently maimed.

  36. 2 AA batteries ? by CharmElCheikh · · Score: 2, Interesting

    How long will 2 AA batteries last shooting so much power ?

    --
    My /. user ID is probably higher than yours
    1. Re:2 AA batteries ? by gringer · · Score: 1

      Well, let's think about this:

      245mW laser (from article), 2*1700mAh alkaline battery (the low-end from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AA_battery)

      2*1700mAh / 245mW = approx. approx. 13.877551 h, so a bit under 14 hours.

      Gosh, that seems like quite a long time. I guess the diode would overheat well before that if that were continuous drain.

      --
      Ask me about repetitive DNA
    2. Re:2 AA batteries ? by Malekin · · Score: 1

      That depends entirely on the batteries as there's quite a range of capacities. At around 200mW, cheap batteries would probably run the laser for an hour or two, and expensive batteries for about 20 hours.

    3. Re:2 AA batteries ? by Malekin · · Score: 1

      Batteries don't maintain their peak voltage as they discharge; the laser will stop working long before the battery is exhausted.

  37. Darwin Awards by Mr.+Lwanga · · Score: 1

    For some reason, there is a real genius out there who will get the Darwin Award for building this device and looking straight into to it for a prolonged period of time, with both eyes.

    1. Re:Darwin Awards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have nothing against people blinding themselves as a result of their own stupidity... what I have a problem with is that these idiots will try them out on their friends /passerby etc. as a pratical joke and end up blinding innocent third parties

  38. Is this the most irresponsible thing ever posted.. by caitsith01 · · Score: 0

    on slashdot?

    Oh wait, I forgot about this...

    But seriously. Cue a bunch of geeks arguing that teaching people how to build dangerously powerful lasers from cheap and widely available components is a Great Thing.

    How hard would it be to align a couple of dozen of these in a rack, park your truck next to an airport, and aim it at the cockpit of a plane as it lands or takes off? Very easy, I'd say. Here in Australia we had this just this week.

    I'm normally the first person to argue against hysteria about terrorism, but I can't help but think that whether it's terrorists or standard variety morons, giving people dangerous tools and no training is a poor idea.

    Up next: the US government bans DVD burners...

    --
    Read Pynchon.
  39. Fuck safety by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

    Use the IR diode :)

  40. Wire stripper by ealott · · Score: 1

    I'd be very interested to use this as a wire stripper, just like in the movie Executive Decision. I imagine most of the wires will need to be black or green and will require a few seconds of exposure before the insulation could be burned away, but having a perfectly stripped wire would be worth it. Even better is being able to strip any segment of the wire, not just the ends. Another good use would be to pop those annoying mylar balloons that litter vaulted ceilings after special occasions. I've searched Mouser.com and Digikey for laser diodes that are 150-200 mW, but to no avail. It would be great if anyone knows where to order only the diode.

    1. Re:Wire stripper by Ignis+Flatus · · Score: 1

      i wouldn't do that for fear of reflections off the exposed wire (although a properly guarded assembly line version might be OK). but if you want a quality wire stripper, there's a heated tweezer you can buy that will even make perfect cuts in teflon-coated wire without making a nick in the wire. this prevents so many problems that the military even requires it for their cable assemblies and such. something like this: http://www.series4.co.uk/prodeqpt/section01/ds5.ht m

    2. Re:Wire stripper by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1

      Laser + Shiny Targets = Bad

    3. Re:Wire stripper by ealott · · Score: 1

      Brilliant! Even simpler and safer. Thanks a billion.

  41. old news - been done before by garlicbready · · Score: 1

    nothing new here I've seen this before
    http://reprap.org/bin/view/Main/LaserEtchTool
    http://www.felesmagus.com/pages/lasers-howto.html
    the above has more detail including a circuit diagram

  42. MY EYES! by Aqua+OS+X · · Score: 4, Funny

    MY EYES! The googles do nothing!

    --
    "Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
    1. Re:MY EYES! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The GOOGLES?

    2. Re:MY EYES! by robertdh · · Score: 1

      That's why you should be using goggles.

  43. What about the radiation? by RaceCarDriver · · Score: 1

    Is there enough that it could be harmful? (I mean in general, not pointed at eye(s))

    1. Re:What about the radiation? by Wilson_6500 · · Score: 1

      The type of radiation produced by lasers is purely non-ionizing*, which means that it causes its damage more or less entirely through radiative heating. This means, basically, that it burns through things like one would expect. This laser diode is almost certainly NOT eye-safe by any stretch, but I would venture to guess that you would have to train it on yourself for at least a second or two to cause any burns--that's a GUESS, though, judging from the amount of time it took to light that match. I don't know the temperature at which strike-on-box matches ignite, but if the laser can deposit that much energy in only a second or so it can probably cause a burn if you focused it directly onto skin. I would NOT suggest trying this out.

      *High-frequency (ultraviolet, basically) lasers can put out UV radiation, some of which is considered ionizing and poses unique health hazards. If you're talking strictly about ionizing radiation (like what an X-Ray machine puts out), then there is virtually no radiation hazard from just about any laser with which the average person will come into contact. In this case--probably about a 700-800 nm laser diode--"laser radiation" refers to the output of visible and IR light--which is very, very likely to pose a hazard if trained on the eyes (possibly even in an indirect or scattered reflection) or directly onto the skin.

    2. Re:What about the radiation? by Alaria+Phrozen · · Score: 1

      I sure hope not. I like to ride things, and well... I sit on my comp with it between my legs, and the dvd burner is tucked just under my balls!

    3. Re:What about the radiation? by SamP2 · · Score: 1

      Hate to break it to you, but the temperature required to ignite a match is around 1600C. Way more than enough to cause 3rd degree burns or worse.

  44. Cool 10 min. Reduced eyesight for 50 years by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    AAAGH. It was cool. Now I have no pain, but also no leftside peripheral view on my left eye.

  45. Not Cool by Saggi · · Score: 1

    This is not Cool... actually it's quite hot.

    --
    -:) Oh no - not again.
    www.rednebula.com
  46. Re: Just plain stupid - IR lasers are dangerous by danskal · · Score: 2, Informative

    You are wrong! Great freedom comes with great responsibility, and freedom of speech does not have to be harmful.

    Freedom of speech or not, it is irresponsible to tempt people with limited or no knowledge to mess with technology that is likely to blind them or others. There is no age limit for readers of this site, so you have to assume that you might be speaking to teenagers or even kids. I would have thought that americans, with their love of lawsuits, would have learnt that by now.

    Especially IR lasers (invisible lasers) are dangerous, because they will damage your eyes and you will not even blink or know what happened. The first thing that happens is you feel pain, and the damage is done.

    Kids, have a game of soccer instead.... you might actually get a tan and some friends

  47. Umm, this isn't a toy.. by wamerocity · · Score: 3, Funny
    It's a personal Protective device. I, for one, plan on keeping this handy or even making it find a home in a smaller case that can run on button cells (if only for a few seconds) purely as a protective device.

    Pepper spray? My balls! Nothing to teach an assailant a lesson like losing vision in one eye.

    actually the one thing I am VERY interested in is if can produce enough pinpoint heat to start a flammable liquid on fire from a distance...oh.. I think I just came.

    --
    "Thank you for using Stop-n-Drop, America's favorite suicide booth since 2008"
    1. Re:Umm, this isn't a toy.. by KDan · · Score: 1

      And then when the police come and you give them your report you'll be arrested and put in jail for owning and operating a high-powered laser without a licence. Well done, genius.

      Daniel

      --
      Carpe Diem
    2. Re:Umm, this isn't a toy.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you plan to ask your assailant to hold still while you aim it at one of their eyes, I doubt it would do you any good. Most firearms classes teach to aim at the torso since it is the largest area on the body and will minimize your chances of missing compared to the head. If its hard to hit somebody in the head with a pistol during an attack, what makes you think you would be able to hit somebody's pupil with a laser while you're being punched, stabbed, shot at, etc? If my sarcasm detector is off and you're joking, just disregard this.

    3. Re:Umm, this isn't a toy.. by Beyond_GoodandEvil · · Score: 1

      And then when the police come and you give them your report you'll be arrested and put in jail for owning and operating a high-powered laser without a licence. Well done, genius.

      An old saying comes to mind,"Better to be judged by 12 than carried by 6." Of course this device isn't a toy and I am sure your local news will run the story of the young man who now can't enjoy a viewmaster or drive at night due to lasing his eye. But you can't always protect people from themselves nor should you try.

      --
      I laughed at the weak who considered themselves good because they lacked claws.
    4. Re:Umm, this isn't a toy.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you want to pepper spray your balls? That's almost as bad an idea as building a high-powered laser for home security purposes.

    5. Re:Umm, this isn't a toy.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the Italian version (which my mother (who is Italian) is fond of quoting whenever we have one of those silly court cases here in the UK where someone has injured an intruder in their home) translates as "better an ugly trial than a beautiful funeral".

  48. Geneva convention by Doug+Neal · · Score: 1

    Assuming this is laser is actually capable of blinding someone (which it rather looks like it is) then technically it's banned by the Geneva convention. And all with equipment that you can find in your own home... awesome!

    1. Re:Geneva convention by Ignis+Flatus · · Score: 1

      it'd be interesting to see what the wavelength is. US military laser rangefinders that i'm familiar with use a near infrared frequency. this one looks visible.

    2. Re:Geneva convention by ThePeices · · Score: 1

      The guy in the video was American ( Soddering? ), the Geneva Convention doesnt apply there.

  49. Just the thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    for indulging in my women-popping-balloons fetish at long range..

  50. Magnum by jlebrech · · Score: 0

    I plan on converting an old Magnum by having expendable laser cartridges, and ill have a cable coming from a backpack to the back of cylinders.

    My backpack will be about 50v and the lasers should only last half a second but will blast quite a powerful charge and a big recoil from the dieing laser diode.

    It's the future.

  51. One Word: DHS by freedom_india · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Screw Geneva convention.
    Our own Govt. will sick the DHS on us before we can even "think" about maglite.
    Let me count the ways...
    1. Maglite would be under an unspeakable warrant by FBI and DHS for producing WMDs.
    2. Pilots toolkits would no longer conetain maglites.
    3. People who bought, borrowed or lent maglites would be under investigation for procuring or distributing WMDs...oh of course thaey can't tell it to even their families.
    4. Anyone caught in the actual usage of such maglite would be arrested and rendered either to their native country (Rudy Polanski would be sent to Poland, etc.) or rendered to Gitmo.
    5. Congress would pass two law: One would be to outlaw maglite-like bulbs and another allots about $5 billion of taxpayers money to subsidise Maglite Corp. Also since maglites are made in CHina this would make FTC to ban all chinese imports of bulbs, etc.
    6. Ebay would be pulling down as rapidly as possible all maglite sales...
    7. Maglites would be traded as currency in Second Life and WoW.
    8. Someone would beat a cop with a maglite and it would be classified immediately as a First-Degree assault weapon on par with Colt Magnum .38 special.

    Welcome to US of A.

    --
    "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
  52. Obligatory by AkumaReloaded · · Score: 1

    Move along nothing to see here. Oh wait maybe there is, just don't look into it directly, or using a mirror of anykind.

    1. Re:Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If only Medusa had had a frickin' laserbeam on her head.

  53. not by aiming it at his eyes... by mindlessLemming · · Score: 1

    Since when did being blind remove you from the gene pool?
    I can think of somewhere you could aim it to become eligible for a Darwin Award... ...ouch!

    (captcha: "treasure", as in jewels, as in OUCH!)

  54. Dangerous by KDan · · Score: 5, Informative

    What the article doesn't, and should say:

    This is a very dangerous toy

    IT WILL BLIND YOU IMMEDIATELY IF:

    - You look at it
    - You shine it on a reflective surface that shines it back into your eye

    No joke, people. Don't try this at home. I'd actually argue that this video is irresponsible since it does not mention the dangers of the item being built at any point. It will probably be uploaded on Youtube and a lot of innocent, curious kids will end up with one fewer eye as a result of this video.

    DO NOT USE UNSAFE LASERS WITHOUT WEARING THE APPROPRIATE PROTECTIVE GEAR (special goggles can be obtained for specific wavelengths, which will ensure that you cannot see the laser - and hence it can't hurt you).

    Daniel (who was paying attention during the Physics Dept 'laser safety' lecture)

    --
    Carpe Diem
    1. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Apologies for replying to my own comment...

      TO EDITORS: PLEASE ADD SAFETY WARNING TO THE ARTICLE SUMMARY!
      This is an irresponsibly dangerous video with no safety warning.

    2. Re:Dangerous by JohnFluxx · · Score: 5, Informative

      I nearly blinded myself. I work with lasers, and was trying to align one of the mirrors. I misaligned one slightly, causing the beam to shine in my eye. I looked away immediately, but could only see darkness in that eye. I was so shit scared.

      I was in a foreign country. The company I worked for rushed me to hospital and this foreign doctor explains to my collegues that she needs to inject a needle in behind the back of my eye. You need to prevent the back of the eye from bruising and swelling up.

      She takes out her book of english and says slowly "This will..... hurt". And it did.

      Thankfully after 2 weeks my eyesight was back to normal.

      So please everyone - do be very careful. And if anything happens, it is _vital_ to get to a _eye_ hospital as soon as possible.

    3. Re:Dangerous by somersault · · Score: 5, Funny

      Pfft, it's "just plain cool" - ain't no way it can be unsafe!

      Next week on /. - how to convert your BB gun to fire 9mm rounds!

      --
      which is totally what she said
    4. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "What the article doesn't, and should say:

      This is a very dangerous toy

      IT WILL BLIND YOU IMMEDIATELY IF:

      - You look at it
      - You shine it on a reflective surface that shines it back into your eye

      No joke, people. Don't try this at home. I'd actually argue that this video is irresponsible since it does not mention the dangers of the item being built at any point. It will probably be uploaded on Youtube and a lot of innocent, curious kids will end up with one fewer eye as a result of this video.

      DO NOT USE UNSAFE LASERS WITHOUT WEARING THE APPROPRIATE PROTECTIVE GEAR (special goggles can be obtained for specific wavelengths, which will ensure that you cannot see the laser - and hence it can't hurt you).

      Daniel (who was paying attention during the Physics Dept 'laser safety' lecture)"

      Geez Tipper, how is natural selection supposed to work with padding on every corner and disclaimers with every experiment? I was waiting to read: "WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN! WON'T SOMEBODY THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN?" So your the reason I have "THIS IS NOT A TOY" written on the bags from the store.

      Your statement about being an irresponsible video. Why? Because it doesn't have a disclaimer that fits your needs? There is a warning, they just chose not to YELL it.

      FYI, when somebody goes to pull the lazer from the DVD burner, the warning is there for their reading pleasure. If they choose to ignore it in a blind fury (pun intended) to burn a speck of paper, well, the idiot crowd is always looking for a new leader.

      Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.

    5. Re:Dangerous by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 2, Insightful

      re:special goggles can be obtained for specific wavelengths

      Anyone know the wavelength for a DVD diode? Would suck to buy protection and then be wearing the wrong ones before getting clobbered by an errant beam.

      (seriously, I like the idea of safety, but want a little more info)

    6. Re:Dangerous by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Funny

      this foreign doctor explains to my collegues that she needs to inject a needle in behind the back of my eye.

      She takes out her book of english and says slowly "This will..... hurt".
      Thank you for giving me tonight's horrible nightmare.

      If I wet the bed, I'm sending you the laundry bill.
      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    7. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Even with a safety warning, where I come from (England), the local little horrors already often try and blind bus drivers with laser pointers.

      If they get hold of one of these, I wouldn't like to be a bus driver. It's silly to talk about responsibility. These kids have none. And if they succeeded - there would be virtually no consequences to them - a telling off from the police maybe - while the bus driver is condemned to a life of blindness.

      I'm not saying the solution is to ban this information. You can't. We are entering a pretty hellish world in some ways.

    8. Re:Dangerous by somersault · · Score: 1

      Yep. In Scotland, these guys are commonly known as 'neds', but the worst I've seen happen with laser pointers is someone being a twat while the adverts are on at the cinema :p Seems our delinquents are as well funded as the English ones? ;)

      --
      which is totally what she said
    9. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I totally agree. This is an exceedingly dangerous post and should really be removed.
      I'm not too worried about idiots blinding themselves. I'm far more worried about malicious idiots blinding loads of innocent people without ever being caught.

    10. Re:Dangerous by hatchet · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You guys need warnings on everything. Do you know a knife will kill you if you thrust it in your chest? They should put a warning on knives too!
      I think they should actually remove all safety warnings from all items. Will make a little more room for Darwin to kick-in.

    11. Re:Dangerous by JonathanR · · Score: 3, Funny

      Oh yeah? How much does it cost to hang the sheets out on the line to dry?

    12. Re:Dangerous by Xiaran · · Score: 1

      Even with the appropriate googles you need to be careful. My left eye was slightly damaged when a 5mW HeNe laser accidentally reflected into it... I was wearing gogle but soem coherent radiation got thru.

    13. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Secondly you risk injury if when you take the drive, instead of removing the laser from it you lift it up and hit yourself over the head with it.

      Don't forget to breathe.

    14. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      If you're planning to build one of those AND you 'like the idea of safety' then I suggest you do some serious research beforehand, instead of hoping for a correct answer by a random slashdotter..

    15. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I've been reading Slashdot for 8 years, and this is the scariest comment I've ever read. Like, Horror Film scary. Really really scary. I'm glad things turned out okay. You should write a film.

    16. Re:Dangerous by NeverVotedBush · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think the point here is that a little itty bitty laser diode doesn't seem intrinsically dangerous to a lot of people. A knife, for some reason, is easier to understand that it can and will cut you if it is mishandled. But a little self-education on the dangers of a knife generally doesn't result in blindness.

      The only saving grace in this article and video is that the beam will hopefully not be that well collimated over a longer distance and when idiots shine it at other people, the damage will be less and the people will have time to look away before they get serious damage.

      Also, a laser like this would probably leave lines or dots burned into the retina. It isn't as bad as a pulsed laser that can literally rip the retina off the back wall of the eye because of what are essentially sonic booms in the eye due to the fast rise times and heating pulses. But if it can burn a hole in a piece of paper, imagine what it can do to all your rods and cones when your eye focusses the beam into an even smaller and more intense spot in your eye.

      I agree with all the other posters who say the video should be removed and that this article should be pulled.

    17. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Here in the US we call them douchebags, assholes, fucktards,and asshats.

    18. Re:Dangerous by vrmlguy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      As of five minutes ago, I don't want your stupid goggles, I want freaking DVD-frequency contact lens that can be worn 24x7. In a few hours, there are going to be jokers wandering the streets with these things blinding random victims, and I want to be protected, damn it. On a more serious note (yes, the above is intended to be modded "funny"), could a contact lens work? If it blocks the light via absorption, then you've just moved the hot-spot from the retina to the cornea. Still, I guess that corneal transplants are more practical than retinal.

      --
      Nothing for 6-digit uids?
    19. Re:Dangerous by Himring · · Score: 4, Funny

      The editors cannot change the article as they have killed themselves with their new maglite lasers....

      --
      "All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
    20. Re:Dangerous by PyrotekNX · · Score: 1

      Just become a laser beam is invisible doesn't mean that it can't hurt you. It is actually significantly more dangerous working with invisible lasers such as ones in the UV frequencies like CD-ROM ones. At least with the red laser, you know where the beam is pointed. Protective laser goggles are made to work with specific lasers. They filter out the harmful ionized part of the laser, that does not always mean that they filter out the visible light spectrum.

    21. Re:Dangerous by bkr1_2k · · Score: 0

      Future reference, contact lenses don't block light. They let light pass and change the shape of your eye to refocus the light in the proper place.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    22. Re:Dangerous by kotj.mf · · Score: 5, Funny

      This is a very dangerous toy

      IT WILL BLIND YOU IMMEDIATELY IF:

      - You look at it
      - You shine it on a reflective surface that shines it back into your eye

      Pussy.

      I've got one sitting right here on my desk, and I can shine it in to my eyes with absolutely no problems. Allow me to demonstrate...

      Srr?

      Sbao;utelu ni orpbkens,

      --
      hang brain.
    23. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope it gets put up on youtube. We need more stuff like this, more dangerous stuff really. It might help thin the herd a bit.

    24. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative
      If you liked that, here's a charming story from Laser Focus, August 1977.

      When the beam struck my eye I heard a distinct popping sound, caused by a laser-induced explosion at the back of my eyeball. My vision was obscured almost immediately by streams of blood floating in the vitreous humor, and by what appeared to be particulate matter suspended in the vitreous humor. It was like viewing the world through a round fishbowl full of glycerol into which a quart of blood and a handful of black pepper have been partially mixed. There was local pain within a few minutes of the accident, but it did not become excruciating. The most immediate response after such an accident is horror. As a Vietnam War Veteran, I have seen terrible scenes of human carnage, but none affected me more than viewing the world through my bloodfilled eyeball. In the aftermath of the accident I went into shock, as is typical in personal injury accidents.

      As it turns out, my injury was severe but not nearly as bad as it might have been. I was not looking directly at the prism from which the beam had reflected, so the retinal damage is not in the fovea. The beam struck my retina between the fovea and the optic nerve, missing the optic nerve by about three millimeters. Had the focused beam struck the fovea, I should have sustained a blind spot in the center of my field of visions. Had it struck the optic nerve, I probably would have lost sight of that eye.

      The beam did strike so close to the optic nerve, however, that it severed nerve-fiber bundles radiating from the optic nerve. This has resulted in a crescent-shaped blind spot many times the size of the lesion.

      The diagram is a Goldman-Fields scan of the damaged eye, indicating the sightless portions of my field of view four months after the accident. The small blind spot at the top exists for no discernible reason; the lateral blind spot is the optic nerve blind spot. The effect of the large blind area is much like having a finger placed over one's filed of vision. Also, I still have numerous floating objects in the field of view of my damaged eye, although the blood streamers have disappeared. These `floaters' are more a daily hindrance than the blind areas, because the brain tries to integrate out the blind area when the undamaged eye is open. There is also recurrent pain in the eye, especially when have been reading too long or when I get tired. This was caused by a reflection from an infrared laser beam of fairly low power (a 10 ns pulse totalling 6 millijoules). Note that the researcher wasn't actually looking directly at the reflection... the reflected beam was just in his field of vision and directed toward one of his eyes. So for those people who think 'not looking at the beam' is an adequate safety procedure... it isn't.
    25. Re:Dangerous by rbb · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree with all the other posters who say the video should be removed and that this article should be pulled.

      I was with you all the way on your comment until you said that.

      Removing the article (or the video) won't make this go away, a clear warning however might at least stop some people from getting hurt.
      --
      In God We Trust, Others We Monitor
    26. Re:Dangerous by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They can block wavelengths and there are brands out there that are designed with the intent to block certain wavelengths.

      However, I am not aware of any that are designed as laser protection.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    27. Re:Dangerous by Ngarrang · · Score: 1

      Pfft, it's "just plain cool" - ain't no way it can be unsafe!

      Next week on /. - how to convert your BB gun to fire 9mm rounds! I used to use a BB gun to launch bottle rockets. The trick to learn was when to fire the bottle rocket at the right time before it went off to gain the most height. Sure, we guessed wrong occasionally and the rocket would come flying back to Earth and explode on the ground, but mad science is filled with such "learn" opportunities.
      --
      Bearded Dragon
    28. Re:Dangerous by ricegf · · Score: 1

      Future reference, so do glasses. They can be designed to block certain wavelengths, though - hence, safety glasses, er, contacts.

    29. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      I'm increasingly of the opinion that the only proper way to pounish somone who intentionally wounds/maims someone is to do the same thing to them. Only withplenty of warning so they have time to get really fucking scared. No other punishment really means anything in the end.

      You blind someone intentionally - say goodbye to YOUR sight.

    30. Re:Dangerous by jahudabudy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Your idea of cleaning piss stains off of sheets is hanging the sheets out to dry? I think you misunderstood what your mom meant when she said she liked having crisp sheets on the bed.

      --
      ...sometimes, in order to hurt someone very badly, you have to tell that person terrible lies. - PA
    31. Re:Dangerous by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1

      Ewwwww.....

    32. Re:Dangerous by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 5, Funny

      No problem. He just need to wait until a reply gets modded up +5 Informative. That's a sure way to guarantee that anything posted on Slashdot will be accurate, with correct precision, and not be filled with crackpot theories, right?

    33. Re:Dangerous by Ash+Vince · · Score: 4, Informative

      Next week on /. - how to convert your BB gun to fire 9mm rounds! You do realise that this can be done to certain models? Here are some links :)

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/ne ws/2003/01/05/ngun105.xml
      http://www.criminal-information-agency.com/firearm s_record.php?id=8
      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    34. Re:Dangerous by dintech · · Score: 5, Informative

      My contact lenses block the government mind control frequency being sent through the television.

    35. Re:Dangerous by E++99 · · Score: 1

      I agree with all the other posters who say the video should be removed and that this article should be pulled.
      First of all, this is a 200mW diode at the most. Yes, it's dangerous, but not to be confused with the much more powerful research lasers in these lovely anecdotes of instant mutilation being bandied about.

      But pull the story??? Any moron can buy the same thing off any number of websites for a couple hundred bucks. Building one from a DVD burner is cheaper, but it requires a certain level of intelligence to succeed. I think a warning is sufficient.

    36. Re:Dangerous by EddyPearson · · Score: 2, Funny

      You're blatantly a bus driver aren't you... Taunted and traumatized by Kids on your bus. Blinded with their home made laser beams. Made bitter by the Police's unwillingness to help. You're a perfect candidate for vigilanteism. Drive a Taxi instead...

      --
      You feel sleepy. Close your eyes. The opinions stated above are yours. You cannot imagine why you ever felt otherwise.
    37. Re:Dangerous by skeeto · · Score: 5, Funny

      This is a very dangerous toy

      IT WILL BLIND YOU IMMEDIATELY

      Humbug! All my life they have been telling me masturbation does the same exact thing.

    38. Re:Dangerous by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      What the article doesn't, and should say:

      This is a very dangerous toy

      IT WILL BLIND YOU IMMEDIATELY IF:

      - You look at it
      - You shine it on a reflective surface that shines it back into your eye Hmm, dangerous homemade laser-based toys you can build yourself. Something makes me think of lightsabers here. :) Seriously, though, can you imagine how fucking dangerous a real lightsaber would be? We're talking about the danger levels of a tablesaw, handgun, and angry rottie and putting them all in one device. With a regular sword, you can nick yourself on the blade but you have to swing it with a bit of force to take off fingers. There's some mass involved to get the thing moving. A lightsaber, there's no mass in the blade. I'm not even sure how much resistance the blade encounters when moving through an object, from the movies it looks like a hot knife through butter. Leo Frankowski wrote a neat time travel book where the engineers who invented the device created utility tools out of a dimensional forcefield device. Different pseudoscience from a lightsaber but the same effect and the engineers said as much with big grins. Nice tools, but one of the engineers took off most of the fingers on one hand by accident.

      But back on topic, who the hell plays with lasers for fun? They scare the shit out of me. Yeah, safe if you don't screw up. How many people can honestly say they'll never, ever, EVER make a mistake? That's why I'm into computers, mostly the software side: they have undo buttons and restore disks. With hardware, undo buttons don't put the magic smoke back in the chips.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    39. Re:Dangerous by somersault · · Score: 1

      I didn't actually, the idea just popped into my head randomly :p

      --
      which is totally what she said
    40. Re:Dangerous by blane.bramble · · Score: 1

      You do know there is a big difference between a BB gun and an air rifle, don't you?

    41. Re:Dangerous by MarcoG42 · · Score: 1

      I agree with letting Darwin "do his work", as it were, but you'd be surprised at how boredom begets stupid. While in school in the Navy to become a Corpsman (medic) I heard countless stories of many marines fucking themselves up with their K-Bars (think Rambo knife). Marines don't have their own medical personnel, so the Navy fills that billet. One of the better stories was a Marine who wondered whether his flack jacket would stop his K-Bar, so he wrapped his flack jacket around his THIGH. For those of you who don't know, a flack jacket will not stop a pointed object from penetrating. Anyway, he stabbed himself in the thigh, severing his femoral artery. Similar story with two Marines, only one was wearing the jacket and the other had the K-Bar....knife wound to the chest and a dead Marine.

      --
      If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
    42. Re:Dangerous by RealGrouchy · · Score: 5, Funny

      It will probably be uploaded on Youtube and a lot of innocent, curious kids will end up with one fewer eye as a result of this video. Yes, but on the bright side the eye patches will help identify the willing-to-do-anything children at a distance, and we need more pirates anyway.

      - RG>
      --
      Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
    43. Re:Dangerous by MetalPhalanx · · Score: 1

      Whoa, you made tin foil contacts? I gotta get me a set of those!

    44. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Has anyone had any experience with pulsed lasers of this class? 6mJ in a 10ns pulse corresponds to a peak power of 6E-3J/10E-9S = .6E6 = 600kW which seems (to a laser neophyte) like it would be an wonderful ablation hole/plasma generator - and definitely not a low power beam.

      Obviously the lasers in the article aren't "low power" either.

    45. Re:Dangerous by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 4, Funny

      Actually, if the little turds use one of these modified pointers, you can easily find and pound their asses.

      Jacking up the power like this make the ENTIRE BEAM visible, not just the point.

      I still want a laser powerful enough to deface bumper stickers and write insults into the paint on cars...

    46. Re:Dangerous by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      I nearly blinded myself. I work with lasers, and was trying to align one of the mirrors. I misaligned one slightly, causing the beam to shine in my eye. I looked away immediately, but could only see darkness in that eye. I was so shit scared.

      I was in a foreign country. The company I worked for rushed me to hospital and this foreign doctor explains to my collegues that she needs to inject a needle in behind the back of my eye. You need to prevent the back of the eye from bruising and swelling up.

      She takes out her book of english and says slowly "This will..... hurt". And it did.

      Thankfully after 2 weeks my eyesight was back to normal.

      So please everyone - do be very careful. And if anything happens, it is _vital_ to get to a _eye_ hospital as soon as possible. Jesus fucking Cthulhu... I puss out when they give me the glaucoma test. There was this Japanese WWII ace, Subaru Sakai, who had shrapnel in his eye. The doc had to do work in there without anesthesia and the guy had to hold still, no flinchies. That dude's either got 'nads like Gibraltar or an amazing ability to space out of the moment.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    47. Re:Dangerous by bberens · · Score: 1

      Forget mace as a personal safety device, just give your lady friend one of these puppies. Mace will slow them down for a few minutes, or not... just make them mad. Permanently blinding them? They'll stop whatever they were going to do for sure.

      --
      Check out my lame java blog at www.javachopshop.com
    48. Re:Dangerous by QMO · · Score: 1

      But, wait!

      That kind of contact lens might change the apparent color of my eyes.

      I could be in one of those silly vampire shows, and they wouldn't have to hire actual vampires anymore.

      I think that for what they'd save on their workers comp insurance they could pay me a LOT of money and still come out ahead.

      But this will only be possible if our technology progresses to the point where I can get fake fangs, too.

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    49. Re:Dangerous by bkr1_2k · · Score: 1

      I wasn't aware they were doing that with contacts these days. Good to know.

      --
      "Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
    50. Re:Dangerous by mallyone · · Score: 1

      I would argue that anyone who attempts to make this, without first researching the subject would be the irresponsible ones. Besides, the lesson taught by shooting your eye out with this official red ryder laser cannon would last a lifetime :)

    51. Re:Dangerous by Ihlosi · · Score: 4, Funny
      Jacking up the power like this make the ENTIRE BEAM visible, not just the point.

      Visible means little when you're blind.

    52. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      CD-ROM's are InfraRed (IR) not UV.

      Laser goggles work like any other color filter - they asorb the energy in a given part of the spectrum. Which for, for DVD lasers, means that they need to block out a chunk of the spectrum around 650nm (i.e. red). Haven't seen one in person, but I'd expect it to have a blue-green tint...

    53. Re:Dangerous by Gr8Apes · · Score: 1

      Thanks for a really informative bit. That should be required reading on a regular basis for those working with lasers, and definitely before they are used the first time.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    54. Re:Dangerous by HeroreV · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Here's an idea: How about we not seek revenge, and instead try to, actually, you know... improve society?

      No? Hate the idea? Oh well, I figured I'd throw it out there.

    55. Re:Dangerous by john83 · · Score: 1

      No problem. He just need to wait until a reply gets modded up +5 Informative. That's a sure way to guarantee that anything posted on Slashdot will be accurate, with correct precision, and not be filled with crackpot theories, right? The badgers told him not to.
      --
      Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
    56. Re:Dangerous by CmdrGravy · · Score: 1

      Nice work comrade, I have simply erected a large mirror in front of my Television so the mind control signals are directed right back through the spying tubes to controllers themselves !!! Soon I will have them in my power.

    57. Re:Dangerous by llevity · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not so much the idiots blinding themselves, as a previous poster pointed out. It's them blinding everyone else around them that's more worrying. You know, the ones that bring laser points to movie theaters? One malicious person could go to the front and start randomly shining it over the crowd.

    58. Re:Dangerous by JohnFluxx · · Score: 3, Informative

      For what it's worth, my laser was 30nm pulse of about 3 mJ at 440nm (blue).

    59. Re:Dangerous by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      But this will only be possible if our technology progresses to the point where I can get fake fangs, too.

      Any reasonably competent dentist (of whatever variet(y/ies) makes crowns) could give you fangs. They just wouldn't let you suck blood.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    60. Re:Dangerous by smellsofbikes · · Score: 3, Informative

      CD burners are 780-800 nm, in the IR. DVD's are 660, in the red. Blu-Ray are 405 nm, in the deep blue range. For CD and Blu-ray, welding goggles with a #5 shade would be adequate (complete IR and 10,000x visible attenuation) but for this laser you'd want something that had an OD of more like 7-10 in the red range. A good pair of glasses intended for helium-neon lasers or ruby lasers would probably work, but there are safety glasses intended specifically for these diodes, supplied to people who make them. Expect to pay about $350+ new, but ebay has laser safety goggles for cheaper. But get the technical specs on anything you buy used.

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    61. Re:Dangerous by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm increasingly of the opinion that the only proper way to pounish somone who intentionally wounds/maims someone is to do the same thing to them. Only withplenty of warning so they have time to get really fucking scared. No other punishment really means anything in the end.
      And therefore, you will apply the same theorem to teeth???
    62. Re:Dangerous by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      I nearly blinded myself. I work with lasers, and was trying to align one of the mirrors. I misaligned one slightly, causing the beam to shine in my eye.
      ** CAUTION **
      Do not look in laser with remaining eye!
    63. Re:Dangerous by NDPTAL85 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Why is seeking revenge counter to improving society in your mind?

      Sure revenge has gotten a bad rap but I do believe it could be done right if it was redesigned.

      --
      Mac OS X and Windows XP working side by side to fight back the night.
    64. Re:Dangerous by Stewie241 · · Score: 1

      Future reference, so do glasses. They can be designed to block certain wavelengths, though - hence, safety glasses, er, contacts.

      Hey, they should make glasses that block out ultraviolet light to protect our eyes from the sun! You could call them... hmmm... sunglasses!

    65. Re:Dangerous by d0rp · · Score: 3, Funny

      special goggles can be obtained for specific wavelengths, which will ensure that you cannot see the laser - and hence it can't hurt you Of course if don't get the right wavelengths...

      My eyes! The goggles, they do nothing!

    66. Re:Dangerous by Paulrothrock · · Score: 1

      special goggles can be obtained for specific wavelengths, which will ensure that you cannot see the laser - and hence it can't hurt you


      So they're making peril-sensitive lenses now?

      --
      I'm in the hole of the broadband donut.
    67. Re:Dangerous by dubbreak · · Score: 1

      Daniel (who was paying attention during the Physics Dept 'laser safety' lecture)


      I was paying attention at my laser safety lecture as well. It went something like this:

      DO NOT LOOK INTO LASER WITH REMAINING EYE

      My tuition is probably a bit cheaper.
      --
      "If you are going through hell, keep going." - Winston Churchill
    68. Re:Dangerous by Nexcis · · Score: 0

      I have a legit question.

      When you say dont look at the laser do you mean where it shines or just dont point it into your eye?

      A friend of mine had a broken ps2 that I had to fix. Well I accidentally looked AT the laser not into it.

      Just wondering if thats a bad thing to do.

    69. Re:Dangerous by garvon · · Score: 1

      I read your links.
      You do realize .22 is not 9mm?

    70. Re:Dangerous by DAtkins · · Score: 1

      This is a good story, but why in the hell are we talking about this?

      This just in, you shouldn't look into the sun. Also, don't fire guns at your head or pour gasoline on yourself while you're smoking. Have we gotten so used to the disclaimer that we demand one even when we already know the danger?

      Seriously, we know this already. If you post that this story scared you, or really taught you something - you are a moron. Or perhaps a man sent into the future. Yep, bright lights hurt your eyes.. thanks for the news flash.

    71. Re:Dangerous by Stormcrow309 · · Score: 1

      Laser safety lecture. My lab safety lecture every year came from a petite japanese woman who said, "Do blow shit up and don't get any of this crap on you." I miss chem lab in college.

      --

      In God we trust, all others require data.

    72. Re:Dangerous by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Well technically, trash was the definition of nigger all throughout my childhood. I was actually surprised to hear that some people have an emotional attachment to it where they can call each other that but no one with a different skin color could.

      Anyways, Are you using it as the term trash, or the brotherly affection term?

    73. Re:Dangerous by modecx · · Score: 1

      I still want a laser powerful enough to deface bumper stickers and write insults into the paint on cars...

      Huh, so I'm not the only one with that dream! I've been thinking about that one for quite a while now. I even have this pulsed CO2 laser that I gutted from an old medical unit, I think it could produce enough power to vaporize, or at least bubble paint from a few feet away--or be modified to do so. Still need to mount it to some kind of gimbal and hack a controller together to interactively scale and draw SVG based designs.

      I'm not entirely sure how dangerous the reflection of such high powered infrared light would be to the eyes of other motorists, even if they are several feet away, and that's kinda put a damper on my destructive hobby. I don't really want to blind random people. Now, if I could outfit everyone else with infrared blocking goggles... I'd be all over it.

      Still, it's too bad that air dissipates electron beams so well. It would be far more practical to have a smallish electron gun shooting some fast moving electrons and a few coils to focus and steer the beam. X-Rays be damned.

      --
      Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
    74. Re:Dangerous by yourlord · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Naa.. Then the rapist would sue the victom, and win..

    75. Re:Dangerous by yourlord · · Score: 1

      Bah.. victim .. That submit button is so close to the preview button!

    76. Re:Dangerous by sumdumass · · Score: 3, Funny

      All you have to do is watch it through a fish tank. If a beam comes back at you, it would just difuse or refract in the watter. There is a bonus if it hits the fish.

    77. Re:Dangerous by blincoln · · Score: 1

      I think the point here is that a little itty bitty laser diode doesn't seem intrinsically dangerous to a lot of people.

      That's why I'm going to build mine into an awesome-looking laser pistol casing instead of a mini-Maglite. Problem solved!

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    78. Re:Dangerous by billdar · · Score: 1
      Those are some good links...

      But with airguns commonly reaching 1000+ fps, seems a little redundant... Heck, you can even buy .50cal air rifles now :)

      --
      I am billdar, and I approve this message.
    79. Re:Dangerous by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      I would like one of these a little more powerful and combined with a can of mace. The we could see attackers get slowed down enough so the victim use the laser from a distance to set their cloths on fire and they can literally burn in hell.

    80. Re:Dangerous by Wolfrider · · Score: 2, Funny

      [ Oblig ] " The goggles, they do nothing! "
      :b

      --
      .
      == WolfriderV6 == I'm willing to admit that *I just might* be wrong... Are you??
    81. Re:Dangerous by TychoCelchuuu · · Score: 1

      Jesus Christ, who modded this informative? It must be some sort of side effect of the mind control TV rays!

      --
      Against stupidity the Gods themselves contend in vain.
    82. Re:Dangerous by alienw · · Score: 1

      Ionized part of the laser? What the hell are you smoking? Lasers are just light, not ionizing radiation. Laser goggles are just opaque at the frequency of interest.

    83. Re:Dangerous by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1

      Straight welding goggles *will* do very nearly nothing, with a laser like this -- because they block a lot of incoming light, your eyes dilate, leaving them actually *more* vulnerable to an intense beam. They also wouldn't do anything much to stop a flood of sulfuric acid, either...

      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    84. Re:Dangerous by bioman-laserboy · · Score: 1

      A 6 mJ pulse lasting 10 ns is insanely powerful (power, ha, get it?) The instantaneous power rating would be in the MW range, even though the total energy delivered is not large. Pulsed lasers are by far the most dangerous to work with, especially when it comes to protecting vision. A continuous wave laser gives you time to blink or avert your eye while a pulsed laser does it's damage instantly without giving your reflexes time to work. One 10 ns pulse was enough to permanently damage vision.

    85. Re:Dangerous by marcansoft · · Score: 1

      That's very surprising. 5mW is supposed to be somewhat safe, assuming your blink/aversion reflex is working. Regular laser pointers can be up to 5mW, and everyone and their mom has one of these nowadays, including dumbasses who point them at other people. I haven't seen many stories about people being blinded (or even damaged permantently to any degree) by a 5mW red beam.

    86. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's because when you have a little penis, it only blinds you a little.

    87. Re:Dangerous by Cornflake917 · · Score: 1

      "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth and the whole world would soon be blind and toothless."

      That being said, the kid should still get a thorough beating and further punishment. But in the end, the parents bare the responsiblity of raising a non-sociapathic kid that knows better than to injure someone permanantly. In my opionon, the kid should be taken away from the parents and they should all be neutered.

    88. Re:Dangerous by torkus · · Score: 1

      Why??? /. is usually the group arguing against big business and governmental controls and, in general, being told what to do.

      Granted, a warning is generally a good idea but why can't peope be responsible for their own lives? I mean, the DVD drive has a big warning sticker on it. Half the posts about this are "omg teh dangerz!!!" or "wherz teh warnings???".

      Come on guys (and girls) - how about we let people be vaugely responsible for what they do? Someone else mentioned it i think, but the next thing the FCC will be banning is DVD players. God help us if information about somethign that might be dangerous is used incorrectly is available. Should i be required to sign a wavier when i buy a gas can or propane for my BBQ? Or how about the BBQ itself?

      Come on! Grow up and stop helping the babies. If someone's smart enough to repeat this and stupid enough to blind him/herself...hopefully that will discourage that person from breeding.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    89. Re:Dangerous by kd5ujz · · Score: 1

      I had a friend that would tape (electrical) 20 gauge bird shot shells on to the end of a red rider BB gun. It was dangerous as hell, he would use a full face shield, and occasionally pepper his arm with a few pellets.

      --
      -William
      God is everything science has yet to explain.
    90. Re:Dangerous by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's interesting the number of people here who are worried about others running around with home made high power lasers (which you can buy pre-made for about $100 anyway) who live in a country where it's a constitutionally granted right to run around with whatever sort of gun you prefer.

    91. Re:Dangerous by torkus · · Score: 1

      Crybabies! Why is /. suggesting we sensor information? There is NOTHING in this article or video that is not commonly available information. Granted, it's a novel idea to run the laser in a flashlight but that's about it.

      Who are YOU to decide what's safe for me??? God...I hate you people today.

      --
      You can get rich if you own a politician, but you have to be rich to buy one in the first place.
    92. Re:Dangerous by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You mean to teach people with such crippled intellect and no social or emotional control that they would take from or harm people for their own fun ... well to teach them that there is no consequence to their actions? Good idea, that'll stop them.

      Please, pull your head out of your ass. The lack of oxygen is causing brain damage. You are confusing a nice ideas with the reality of human nature. There will always be asshats who don't and won't care about others, will take from others or harm others to satisfy their own pleasures, and only avoid these avenues when they cause discomfort for themselves. So good idea, let's remove consequences for bad behaviour.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    93. Re:Dangerous by Reziac · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which is pretty much the way it used to work. But nowadays, it's equal treatment for all, equal rights for all, no matter how they treated others or how they trampled the rights of others, the nanny state will protect them all!!

      I'm with you. Beat and then neuter the fuckers.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    94. Re:Dangerous by insertwackynamehere · · Score: 1

      Haha oh my gosh the Glaucoma test.. I went in to get contacts for the first time ever yesterday and got the checkup done. However my maternal grandparents have had glaucoma so they tried to do the test where the blew air into my eye. I was so scared I couldn't keep my head still and I would blink when the air came out. They finally said I could go into the eye doctor's office anyway but they would get me sometime before I left. They didn't. I think that maybe they had had enough of trying to assist me in getting contacts in and out of my eye for 30 minutes upward.

    95. Re:Dangerous by einhverfr · · Score: 1

      Any reason why contact lenses can't block certain wavelengths of light?

      Actually I can think of one in this specific case: mechanism.

      To block the light, it would either need to reflect that frequency, absorbe it, or flouresce.

      Not sure if reflection is an option.

      Absorbtion would heat up the contact and possibly damage your eye.

      Flourescence could be cool though depending on the wavelength, it could either interfere with your vision or damage your eye. OTOH, flourescence into the visual range would at least let you know someone was trying to blind you ;-)

      This doesn't meant that you couldn't block some wavelengths. It just means that you couldn't block them at this sort of power without causing problems as the energy has to go somewhere.

      --

      LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
    96. Re:Dangerous by QMO · · Score: 1

      Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of those wax Halloween fangs I used to see in the late 70's that were edible, even if they did taste like cheap chocolate. (There's another joke there, if you look hard enough. It just isn't any funnier than my others.)

      --
      Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.
    97. Re:Dangerous by insertwackynamehere · · Score: 1

      Haha this is the funniest Slashdot article/thread I have read in a long time. This Informative mod just topped it off.

    98. Re:Dangerous by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      Haha oh my gosh the Glaucoma test.. I went in to get contacts for the first time ever yesterday and got the checkup done. However my maternal grandparents have had glaucoma so they tried to do the test where the blew air into my eye. I was so scared I couldn't keep my head still and I would blink when the air came out. They finally said I could go into the eye doctor's office anyway but they would get me sometime before I left. They didn't. I think that maybe they had had enough of trying to assist me in getting contacts in and out of my eye for 30 minutes upward. I told the optometrist "Look, maybe I'm going to get glaucoma and may I'm not. How about I just start smoking pot now as a prophylactic measure?" He wasn't amused.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    99. Re:Dangerous by insertwackynamehere · · Score: 1

      Well I honestly have no idea, and I wouldn't suggest doing it again but as long you aren't blind now, I doubt you will become blind. Just be more careful next time. From what I understand, laser blindness is immediate.

    100. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I still want a laser powerful enough to deface bumper stickers and write insults into the paint on cars... I want a heat-seeking potato launcher. When I get behind someone driving too slow and who won't willingly pull over, I want to launch one into their tailpipe, so the engine will choke up, and they'll have to pull to the shoulder.
    101. Re:Dangerous by LearnToSpell · · Score: 1

      Trust Slashdot to have a post on masturbation in a story about lasers. I guess it's better than all the people wetting their pants...

    102. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe you meant to say hydrochloric... You're welcome.

    103. Re:Dangerous by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      Because it's easier to conceal a Mini Maglite than a handgun? Because doing this is cheaper than buying a Saturday Night Special? Because there are laws on the possession of guns (age limits, felons, assault weapons)?

      To be perfectly honest, I'm probably going to go make one of these things. I can think of a variety of things both fun and useful to do with one. However, I don't want random kids having these, just like I don't want them having handguns. This can cause too much damage too quickly. I really hope the first person to blind someone gets the book thrown at them by the legal system, as an example to others.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    104. Re:Dangerous by hankwang · · Score: 1

      could a contact lens work? If it blocks the light via absorption, then you've just moved the hot-spot from the retina to the cornea.

      The difference is that on the retina it will be a 10x10 micrometer spot (worst case), while at the cornea it is 5x5 mm. That's a 250-thousand-fold increase in intensity. It will still heat up, but you'll probably blink from the bit that passes through before it burns. A problem is that there aren't many dyes that absorb within a very narrow band around 650 nm (or whatever it is) while letting everything else pass through. Laser safety eyewear for that wavelength range typically has a deep blue-green color. See e.g. here: http://www.noirlaser.com/filters/rb2.html .

    105. Re:Dangerous by jpellino · · Score: 1

      "and the people will have time to look away before they get serious damage."

      Oh? Nerve impulses max out around the speed of sound.
      Last I heard, light travels at the speed of.... um.... light!

      By the time you see it, you're in the same class as those two horror stories above.

      --
      "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
    106. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      When I get behind someone driving too slow and who won't willingly pull over, I want to launch one into their tailpipe, so the engine will choke up, and they'll have to pull to the shoulder.

      Except for the fact that they'll have stalled right in front of you and won't be able to pull anywhere, while you're stuck stopped behind them.

    107. Re:Dangerous by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Both fit easily in a pocket. The price isn't hugely different. You don't have to BUY a gun legally to obtain one. At least it requires a certain amount of skill to make one of these maglight lasers. Of course, you can buy a 200mW laser pointer online, and have been able to do so for years. Interesting that gun fatalities still greatly dwarf laser maimings, including gun fatalities of children.

    108. Re:Dangerous by smellsofbikes · · Score: 1
      --
      Nostalgia's not what it used to be.
    109. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Society would be much improved by removing irresponsible and apathetic sociopaths. A kid would would intentionally blind someone falls under this category.

      Therefore I dont say blind them. I say get rid of them. Lock them up, kill them, ship them to an island somewhere - makes no difference. Removing them from society is the improvement.

    110. Re:Dangerous by Torvaun · · Score: 1

      I'm against kids with handguns too. Personally, I'd like purchasing a gun to require a license that says that the purchaser has been through a gun safety course. Accidents are a problem, and teaching people is a good way to help mitigate that.

      I have no issue with adults having these. I have no issue with adults having guns. My problems with this are not based on crime, they are based on carelessness. The average kid who doesn't know enough to use a gun safely is not going to go out and steal one, and he is not going to be able to go buy one until he turns 18 (21 for handguns). I have no idea what percentage of kids have access to the tools needed to do this, but I personally had access to the things I'd need to make this (other than the lasers, but they were less prevalent back then) well before I was responsible enough to be trusted with something like this.

      Also, I am against kids having things like Paintball and pellet guns without training as well. They have a similar ability to cause irreversible damage to people who aren't wearing protective goggles. It's just easier with a laser.

      --
      I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
    111. Re:Dangerous by Monkey · · Score: 1

      When I saw the cat pacing around at the beginning of the video while he was showing what I thought was a completed laser, I was thinking "Man, this is going to be awesome...".

    112. Re:Dangerous by 6Yankee · · Score: 1

      /. - upside-down "I followed the instructions linked from Slashdot" smiley...

    113. Re:Dangerous by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Actually, if the little turds use one of these modified pointers, you can easily find and pound their asses.
      not if they point it in your eyes first.

      I would say that if you see troublemakers with something like this your best bet would be to turn your back and run like hell. Permanent blindness is going to hurt you far more than missing out on revenge on lowlife scum.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    114. Re:Dangerous by thc69 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Hmm...we could even come up with a catchy way to say it...maybe...

      "An eye for an eye."

      --
      Procrastination -- because good things come to those who wait.
    115. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It may not seem intrinsically dangerous to idiots but that's why there is a nice sticker saying something like: "Caution Laser Radiation" on the device you're gutting to get the diode from.

    116. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Uh, native doctor, foreign patient. You were the foreigner there, not her. Right?

    117. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What was the milliwatts of that laser out of interest?

    118. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Permanent blindness is going to hurt you far more than missing out on revenge on lowlife scum.

      Personally, I find it rather difficult to miss out on revenge whilst peering through a 10x scope. But that's just me, I suppose.

    119. Re:Dangerous by JohnFluxx · · Score: 1

      Well it's a pulsed laser - 30 nanosecond pulses at 3mJ or so each.

      So that would be 100000000 milliwatts. :-)

    120. Re:Dangerous by rpbird · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This is no joke. A certain percentage of ADULTS will look into it. My old Astronomy professor used to invite his students to solar observations in the little observatory on top of the science building. He had to stop when, time after time, after numerous warnings not to cross or even approach the focal point of the projection (a variation of Galileo's projection of sunspots), one or two would always try. He'd pull them back. One time he didn't get there fast enough and a TWENTY-something student stuck his arm in it. Fortunately, it was cold outside, the guy was wearing a plastic windbreaker. The sleeve of the windbreaker went into the focal point. Pow! The guy pulled his arm back before he was burned. My professor gave up. He'd invite people he could trust to observe, but it was no longer open to the general student population or the public. We all think it's fun to make dangerous things. I've done it, and if you're honest, you've done it. We were the lucky ones, we didn't get blown up or scarred for life. I met one of the unlucky ones, who blew off his hand and put out an eye trying to make homemade fireworks. Always warn them! A few won't listen, but many others will. With this laser project, someone should have emulated the Mythbusters: "Don't try this at home....ever!"

    121. Re:Dangerous by Twixter · · Score: 1

      Who are you? Rowdy Roddy Piper? http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096256/

      --

      -Todd

      Put down the sig, and step away from the computer.

    122. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, more pirates! Exactly what we need to combat climate change. Whoever came up with this ingenious meathod...is doing a great service to mankind.

    123. Re:Dangerous by Rebelgecko · · Score: 1

      If someone runs down the street waving a gun in people's faces, most people would recognize that as dangerous. However, most people wouldn't notice anything out of the ordinary about someone with a Mag-Lite flashlight.

      --
      CATS/Diebold '08- All your vote are belong to us!
    124. Re:Dangerous by Killer+Gentoo · · Score: 1

      Sounds like a great plan! I'd get started on it immediately if I were you, as it will take at least 10 or 20 milion years to "evolve" human nature for an improved society,(but then the planet would be hopelessly over-popoulated with mal-evolved humans who can't war and murder when needed.) Then again, that will never happen if we don't remove rotton eggs from the genepool, and sadly blinding them is not enough to shape the future of human evolution, so probably the best method to punish idiot kids who blind bus drivers is to 1. Blind THEM and 2. permanantly remove their ability to reproduce. and 3. Put them on a social services blacklist so they have no chance of leeching off the system. And may I remind you that humans don't come out of the womb with a perfectly developed sense of empathy, it's an emotion that takes time to develop, in the first years of existence, children start out as greedy hedonists, and this stage subsides eventually, sometimes the best way to discipline children is using whatever methods you can, if a child of mine flashed blinding lasers into a bus driver's eye's, I should be perfectly justified as a parent to restrain it and enact a few hours of laser torture, sadly this is what society calls "child abuse", which is a travesty.

    125. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      6 mJ/ 10nS = 6e-3 J / 10e-9 S = 6e5 watts! ... 600kW is an impressive amount of juice, and all dumped in a thin wall of front-line cells -- no wonder it caused such a mess.

    126. Re:Dangerous by linuxscrub · · Score: 1

      Of course, the contact lens, or goggles, protect your eyes by absorbing the appropriate frequency (or frequencies for multi-laser safety goggles).

      The potential effectiveness would depend on the power in the beam, or pulse, of laser light.

      If the beam has sufficient power, it can melt the contact lens or even goggles. The mJ pulses mentioned above could most likely be absorbed by a physically small lens, maybe even an appropriately tinted contact lens.

      Continuous wave (CW) beams are a different matter, although it is unlikely a "joker" could keep a CW beam aimed at a single point on you eye for more than a fraction of a second.

      JP

    127. Re:Dangerous by HeroreV · · Score: 1

      I wasn't saying we shouldn't punish people for bad behavior. I was saying our motivation shouldn't be revenge. We should punish people to improve them, not to get pleasure from their suffering.

    128. Re:Dangerous by trout007 · · Score: 1

      Anyone ever heard of the term outlaw? Before big governments, police, and sitting courts people had local juries to help people settle problems. They would take their case to the jury and the jury would decide the punishment. If the person took the punishment which was usually financial or labor in nature towards the injured party they were still protected under the law. But if they wouldn't show up at court or follow the punishment they became outlaws which really meant you were now outside the law. This basicly meant anyone could do anything to you they wanted and you would have no legal recourse. I wouldn't mind bringing those days back.

      --
      I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
    129. Re:Dangerous by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Thanks, this is a very interesting story !

    130. Re:Dangerous by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      In this case the power (Watts) is of little interest, the energy (Joules) is what did the damage. I've worked with 100mJ IR lasers and they are benchtops. With those you can make little holes in most non-reflective materials.

    131. Re:Dangerous by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Guns are semi-regulated, most are big and loud, and most people don't try to kill other people. Kids, on the other hand, think nonfatal injuries are funny as hell.

    132. Re:Dangerous by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      The way it usually works is that somebody realizes there's a gun when someone gets shot and possibly dies. Someone will realize something bad is happening with a laser when the first person gets shot with it, possibly in the eye, and starts screaming.

      Neither is particularly good, but I really don't think there's a good argument for the former over the latter.

      It's an interesting double standard. Think about it.

    133. Re:Dangerous by ccmay · · Score: 1
      Executing recidivist criminals improves society more than any other thing I can think of.

      And yes, I would give the death penalty to anyone who intentionally blinds someone else, if it were part of a pattern of severely anti-social behavior. I think three felonies of any kind is enough for anyone. Commit a fourth, even if it's shoplifting, and you ought to be hanged in public.

      I am sick of sharing my universe with violent criminal filth, and sick of paying taxes to support them. I want most of them dead. I wish we executed fifty times as many criminals as we already do.

      -ccm

      --
      Too much Law; not enough Order.
    134. Re:Dangerous by brassman · · Score: 1

      "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth" means that the punishment should fit the crime. Those who decry it as "vengeance" forget that it's quite enlightened compared to "Your head for my eye, mofo! Your right arm and an eye for my tooth!"

      --
      "Ain't no right way to do a wrong thing."
    135. Re:Dangerous by XNine · · Score: 1

      OH REALLY? Well, we'll just test this theory of yours out. I just so happened to have built one of these contraptions. And a evidence, since i am typing fine right now, I will now turn the beam on, look directly into it, and begin typing fine again, showing YOU, tha tthis is in fact, untrue. See my comments below after the test: yaui oi wh ;sa[ioywiou 'jkls'lfkja uwefrh 'lk alys a'lkjw yuiej jnvbajbnm kja ; jf a ua io0923 ;adfp ipa 'pao3r488u 7jfhr 98 89y nl'a9 a'aq23 'l;jf9 u'of/aljk k3l34 'ja9iu ah ancvnmn,amcv ajW ' sd lkja

      --
      Never monkey with another monkey's monkey.
    136. Re:Dangerous by HeroreV · · Score: 1

      Yeah, because people were sooooooo happy when we had public hangings. Bring out the children and have a picnic; it's fun for the whole family.

      I'll never understand why anybody would support the death penalty when people are so valuable. Slave labor, medical testing, etc. could have a hugely positive impact. And Reiser should be working on ReiserFS right now, not sitting around doing nothing.

      Please remember: money wasting prisoners + forced labor = money producing prisoners

      We could have companies competing for contracts for prisoners where they paid the state if we just allowed forced labor of prisoners.

    137. Re:Dangerous by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      Someone will realize something bad is happening with a laser when the first person gets shot with it, possibly in the eye, and starts screaming.



      Retinas do not have pain receptors. People who are not familiar with the symptoms will not realize what exactly has happened (and that their vision is going to be irreparably damaged) for quite a while.



      It's an interesting double standard. Think about it.



      The laser toy would allow you to leave several people crippled for life _and_ get away before anyone realizes what has happened.

    138. Re:Dangerous by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      Those who decry it as "vengeance" forget that it's quite enlightened compared to "Your head for my eye, mofo! Your right arm and an eye for my tooth!"



      That's still harmless. Back then, "vengeance" usually included the (extended) family, too. Which lead to long, bloody feuds.

    139. Re:Dangerous by laejoh · · Score: 0

      And for God's sake don't go fishing for a shark and if you do DO NOT ATTEMPT to attach the laser to the shark's head!!!

    140. Re:Dangerous by dintech · · Score: 1

      Kind of different to that. He could see things that no-one else could see. I want to 'not' see something that everyone else can see. Namely thought regulating control signals from the government.

    141. Re:Dangerous by KudyardRipling · · Score: 1

      Not as dangerous as allowing oneself to be a doormat to state or corporate power.

      --
      Submission as evidence constitutes plaintiff and/or prosecutorial misconduct.
    142. Re:Dangerous by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      It's interesting the number of people here who are worried about others running around with home made high power lasers (which you can buy pre-made for about $100 anyway) who live in a country where it's a constitutionally granted right to run around with whatever sort of gun you prefer.
      Obviously, the difference is that gun owners are mature, responsible adults who have to undergo stringent background checks before getting a licence, and are required to train professionally before buying a weapon.
      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    143. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm one of those people who just cannot help themselves but do what they're told explicitly not to.

      Age 5: Don't touch the gas ring on the cooker, you'll burn yourself.

      It hurt.

      Now: Don't look in to the laser beam, you'll go blind.

      Needless to say, in order to avoid all temptation, I will not be making one of these.

    144. Re:Dangerous by nobuddy · · Score: 1

      Can I punish them to get pleasure from their suffering?

    145. Re:Dangerous by Floritard · · Score: 1

      Not to say you don't belong here, but clearly you're wasting your talent for vitriolic revenge fantasies. There are plenty of child abuse stories begging for your input.

    146. Re:Dangerous by GuldKalle · · Score: 1

      Served Cold? With Iced cream maybe? Mmmm, Ice cream

      --
      What?
    147. Re:Dangerous by Starsmore · · Score: 1
      Nice story, but it doesn't give any good reason why we should stop these people.

      I mean if yer stupid enough to stab yourself in the leg when you are bored, or let your buddy stab you in the chest, I really don't think you should be breeding.

      --
      "If Common Sense was so common, it wouldn't be such a valued trait."
    148. Re:Dangerous by MarcoG42 · · Score: 1

      I don't think they should be stopped. I was just pointing out that, regardless of warnings and whatnot, there's always going to be people stupid enough to use it for wrong/dangerous/malicious purposes.

      --
      If nothing else works, a total pig-headed unwillingness to look facts in the face will see us through.
    149. Re:Dangerous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Eh, what? It is fact that even the politicians do not know what is in the giant bills they pass into law. Accidently violating one of these unknown laws makes one a criminal (for more fun, two disparate laws can be combined to make a new rule that is not even apparent if the law is known). From your argument (assuming good faith here), I would consider removing you from society to be a vast improvement. You think it is okay to kill people. Sorry, Charlie. Murder ain't cool. Even for revenge or "to make society better". Instead you are proposing we make society sociopathic. You are advocating for the same disease you complain is a problem.

      I think what you are really sick of is the corruption in government that has private contractors controlling the purse strings and using the "need" for more prisons and more prison spending (remember, there is no necessity to keep expanding if prisoners actually get rehabilitated) as an excuse for taking your and my tax money. And the politicians, the same ones who pass into law bills they do not read, are in on it.

      Have you broken two or more laws in your life? Want to take your own medicine?

      Are you breaking a law right now?

    150. Re:Dangerous by mokumegane · · Score: 1

      I agree. Once something is out in the open, you can't erase it. You can take the parent video down but people have already downloaded it and are probably putting it on other sites. If they aren't, they're emailing it to their friends and family. Having a safety video on what could happen when safety procedures aren't followed would be as much of a fix as you can really do. Having it up at the same time or before the original video was up would have been better. Text would work, too, but I think at least pictures of laser-burned eyes would have more of an impact with the words than the words alone.

    151. Re:Dangerous by 1110110001 · · Score: 1

      Don't try this at home. Shouldn't that be "try this at home". If you go outside you could blind other people, which is even more irresponsible.
  55. Terrar by MichailS · · Score: 1

    So what stops evildoers from blinding their favourite objects of hate from afar on a wide scale now?

    How long until people start wearing eye-burners in their keychain for "protection"?

  56. Re:Is this the most irresponsible thing ever poste by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    C'mon, do you really think terrorists need slashdot as a source for weapons? That's like saying malware writers use public webpages as a source for their 0day attacks.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  57. Re:Just plain cool ??? Just plain stupid by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    That's gone out of fashion. You think guns would still be allowed in the US if the possession wasn't in the constitution? Personal responsibility has been replaced with nanny state.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  58. how long? by RMH101 · · Score: 1
    1. Re:how long? by MichailS · · Score: 1

      I find it scary that everyone is only speaking in terms of that the diod geek would harm himself.

      What would happen if he accidentally burned out an eye of his kid? His wife who happened to lean over the desk? The neighbour next door through the window?

      Or if someone would get the idea to blind some politician, ex-boss or ex-wife from a miles' distance with the use of a DVD laser and a sniper scope?

      This is not a toy, this is a terrible weapon. At least a gun makes a bang and smell, requiring you to be somewhat present physically and is a heavy piece of steel that you can put a modicum of regulation and monitoring on.

      I would think that the main problem with laser diods is not that they may cause an accident, I think the main problem is that they can and will be used maliciously.

  59. A very DANGEROUS idea ! by laplace_man · · Score: 1

    "200 mW will lead to permanent eye damage within 1 microsecond (!) of exposure" Hm perhaps it is dangerous to mention on /. but you can get a very high power out of this diodes with current source chopped so that effective power stays still in limits from the manufacturer. Something like 5W or more can be achieved for a short period of time on a 200 mW diode. Now this laser has a much higher range. You can probably blind Martians with such device :) Anyway this involves some more knowledge of electronics so not every kid can do that...that's why I think it's safe to mention it here. They use this technique in medicine for healing (not eyes)

    1. Re:A very DANGEROUS idea ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please elaborate on this, or provide a reference? I doubt I'll do this as I only have on eye, but I love me some theoretical electronics.

    2. Re:A very DANGEROUS idea ! by laplace_man · · Score: 1

      Hm well ..just create current source and chop that current with NE555 (turn it on and off) or something like that so that average effective power stays under 200mW. Some diodes survive this and some don't I'm not sure which diode is used in DVD player so I can't tell you if this works on this diode...Anyway main idea is to feed that diode with higher current (you get higher power) for a very short period of time. Usually this diodes are in IR spectrum...

  60. As much as I hate lawuits... by SamP2 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I seriously hope someone sues the fuck out of this guy SO badly that he'll never be able to afford a flashlight or a DVD burner again.

    I'd rather get shot with a gun than be blinded with that thing. And unlike guns, any asshole (or kid) can assemble one from parts, with absolutely no regulation, and leave me permanently blind.

    Don't realize how bad this is? OK, imagine this: Someone brings this to a disco and points it towards the revolving sphere = dozens blinded, permanently. This is not a joke. This can be used for terrorism, pure and simple.

    1. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, ANYONE can blind themselves using a knife, the sun, etc ... WITHOUT ANY REGULATION!

    2. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by LiNKz · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Why does everything boil down to the word "terrorism" these days? The new buzzword for the fear department.

      I agree, I was thinking the same thing -- I could just imagine some kid thinking it would be funny to shoot somebody in the eye with one of these things, and there is nothing I can do to protect myself from it.

      I definitely didn't think of 'terrorism', though.

      --
      Proceed with Format (Y/N)? Y
    3. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This can be used for terrorism, pure and simple. Dear god, they're infiltrating our society!
    4. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't realize how bad this is? OK, imagine this: Someone brings this to a disco and points it towards the revolving sphere = dozens blinded, permanently. This is not a joke. This can be used for terrorism, pure and simple.

      In my defense, your Honor, I only blinded people who still go to a disco. They deserve to be blinded.

    5. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by RedShoeRider · · Score: 1
      "This can be used for terrorism, pure and simple"

      If someone bottled up the stentch of my morning bowel movement and brought it to a disco, it could be used for terrorism, pure and simple.

      If someone were to mix a small bottle of bleach and a small bottle of ammonia in the disco, it could be used for terrorism, pure and simple.

      If somone were to bring their lighter into the disco, it could be used for terrorism, pure and simple.

      Point is that just about anything can be used for "terrorism". You spend way too much time watching Fox news, don't you?

      --

      Chris Knight is my hero.

    6. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 1

      "Terrorism" is only about making people afraid something bad will happen to them. You know, "terror."

      If you actually pull that disco stunt, it's nothing to do with terrorism. It's assault, plain and simple.

    7. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by One+Childish+N00b · · Score: 2, Informative

      But none of those are as effective at severe, permanent and indiscriminant damage than this, and who likes to cause severe, permanent and indiscriminant damage to lots of people? That's right, genius, terrorists. I don't know about you, but I like to think the average guy on the street isn't evil enough to do such a thing.

      I cannot overstate this, this is not a fart in a bottle.

      --
      Dealing with lawyers would be a lot less tedious if they all looked like Casey Novak.
    8. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by chuckymonkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So? By the time I was 13 I could build so many different kinds of bombs out of things you can get out of the hardware store that I should have been called a terrorist by today's standards. Here's one for you, know what happens when you mix acetylene with oil? No? Try it sometime pretty fun if you ask me also extremely deadly, there's a reason that acetylene bottles say not to oil the threads of the valve cap. There are so many much worse things that you could do that are well documented on the internet now that I didn't have access to, I actually had to work at stuff like this but these days you don't it's all there for the taking. So really this is pretty small potatoes and you're just having a knee jerk reaction like so many people do. You want to know what was the key instrument of me not hurting myself or others when I started to get really interested in blowing shit up? My father quickly realized that I was going to find a way to do it one way or the other so he taught me the safe way to do it, the same can be applied to lasers. Kids need to be allowed to experiment with stuff that's how you learn and better yourself, keeping kids and teenagers locked up in an iron box and not letting them do dangerous things that are also very educational just churns out the next generation of factory workers. For instance my fascination with explosives led me to make my own brand of rocket fuel, then that led me to want to make a rocket. Since I wanted to make a rocket I learned about CAD and Drafting then made drawings and took them to a machine shop to make said rocket. I launched and guess what? It flew! Amazing! Look at all that I learned along the way! Now take a laser for instance, imagine if a kid saw this and realized that he could do a little engraving with something like this. It may eventually lead him to FAB@home and maybe just maybe he/she would build on of these machines, imagine what they would learn along the way. It's attitudes like yours that stifle the creativity and imagination of future generations. Knee-jerk reactions like ZOMG! teh t'rrists can blind someone serve no one only breed the already stifling culture of fear that we live in now. This could be a great teaching tool, it's fun, cool, and has visible results as well as being inexpensive. I think all physics classes in school should be encouraged to have students build things like this, it leads to interest in the subject and you know what that makes? Wow! You guessed it, a smarted more creative generation of forward thinkers. I could go on for hours but I'm going to quit now before I get all worked up.

      --
      "Some books contain the machinery required to create and sustain universes."-Tycho
    9. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Giant wall of text crits you for 50000000, you die.

    10. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought geeks were for the free flow of information, not suing people for posting a how-to. How about suing the asshole or kid who shines it at people, not the guy just telling them how to do it. Also, it's not that hard to assemble a gun without any regulation...

      Fear seems to be the people's immediate reaction to everything these days.

    11. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by jollyreaper · · Score: 1

      Why does everything boil down to the word "terrorism" these days? The new buzzword for the fear department.

      I agree, I was thinking the same thing -- I could just imagine some kid thinking it would be funny to shoot somebody in the eye with one of these things, and there is nothing I can do to protect myself from it. I wouldn't call it terrorism, I'm just thinking malice. Ok, so in rural areas you get jokers shooting at cars when they drive by. In urban areas, they have to fence off the sidewalks on interstate overpasses because kids will drop rocks on the cars passing below. Just imagine what harm could be done with a laser shining in on the drivers. Tom Clancy had a scene in a book years back where Ding and Clark used a high-power laser to blind the flight crew of a 747 on takeoff. Yikes. How bad are these lasers for reflections and at what distance? I'm assuming you'd need more power for a freeway weapon vs. one that you could hurt yourself with at your desk.

      I remember there was some story about Homeland Security getting upset about a guy with a laser pointer in his backyard, saying he was shining it at aircraft. But that seemed a bit silly since they were talking about aircraft at altitude and it would be so difficult to keep a pointer properly aimed like that.
      --
      Kwisatz Haderach
      Sell the spice to CHOAM
      This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
    12. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by RESPAWN · · Score: 1

      And unlike guns, any asshole (or kid) can assemble one from parts, with absolutely no regulation, and leave me permanently blind.

      Are you kidding me? Have you never heard of a zip gun before? Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip_gun, but in case you don't feel like reading it, a zip gun is basically a small, improvised gun made from a pice of metal tubing. Your basic zip gun can be made from easily scavanged parts, none of which require any sort of license to purchase or acquire. The ammunition would be the hardest component to acquire since you have to be 18 to purchase rifle or shotgun ammo and 21 to purchase handgun ammo. Even then, it's not that hard to get ahold of. To my knowledge, you don't have to register to purchase ammo (at least I don't remember having to do anything other than prove I'm over 21 when I've bought in the past), meaning there's no real oversight of ammo purchases, meaning any apathetic ammo dealer could sell ammo to a minor without much threat of "the man" catching up to him.

      Point is, a zip gun is about 100 times easier to create than this flashlight laser. All you need are some rudimentary tools and you're good to go. The only reason you don't see or hear more about zip guns these days is because real firearms are so much easier to get ahold of and are much safer to operate.

      Oh yeah, and why does everything have to go back to terrorism? People like you who are so scared of the big bad terrorists that their first thought when they see or hear anything bad is to think about how the terrorists could use it to harm them, kind of make me sick. If you're living your life in constant fear of being a victim of a terror attack, then you're letting the terrorists win. They are achieving their goal with you. I don't know about you, but I'm much more afraid of dying in a vehicle accident than in a terror attack. Or of becoming the victim of a violent homicide than a terror attack. In 2001, nearly 3000 people were killed by the 9/11 attacks -- the single deadliest terror attack in the US and incident which sparked off this wave of terrorist paranoia that has swept the US. That same year over 42,000 US people died in vehicle accidents and almost 30,000 US people were killed by guns.

      It's a good thing that you'd rather be shot than blinded by a laser at a disco because you've got a much greater chance of being shot than ever being blinded by a laser weilding terrorist. Stop watching 24 and get a clue. Terrorism isn't nearly as dangerous to you as the government and news media would have you believe*.

      (*Note: I am not, in any way, attempting to trivialize the 9/11 attacks or the grief that the victims families undoubtedly experienced. I'm merely trying to point out that the parent poster needs to stop living his life in fear of the next terror attack because that's just letting the terrorists acomplish their goal and that statistics show he's more likely to die in a manner other than a terror attack.)

      --

      If Murphy's Law can go wrong, it will.

    13. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by Geminii · · Score: 1

      I must have missed the second part of the article, where it explains how to build your own time machine and travel back to the 1970s.

    14. Re:As much as I hate lawuits... by tobyvoss · · Score: 1

      and, after all, the darwin awards are there for a purpose...

  61. Laser tank? by justinlee37 · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised the USA hasn't built a tank designed to permanently blind all of the enemy soldiers.

    Of course, that would lead to all of the enemy soldiers investing in protective eyewear after a single encounter or two, but most of the countries we pick on can barely afford guns as it is.

    Additionally, even the remote possibility of being permanently blinded during battle by a tank that spews out laser grids would do wonders to crush enemy morale.

    Of course, you might say that the enemy will just start carrying around full-length mirrors, but that's a mute point if we give our own soldiers protective eye wear to wear into battle. Additionally, having to carry a big mirror around all the time would really hinder your ability to fight.

    1. Re:Laser tank? by LarsG · · Score: 1

      Geneva Convention Protocol IV on Blinding Laser Weapons. Then again, the US hasn't really shown much interest in complying with international treaties lately so what the heck; those laser designators are dual use, no?

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
    2. Re:Laser tank? by bentcd · · Score: 1

      what the heck; those laser designators are dual use, no? Reminds me of the Night's Dawn trilogy in which the protagonist has a number of communications lasers fitted on his starship. Very long range, very powerful "communications" lasers.
      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    3. Re:Laser tank? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US did design a portable laser weapon for use against targeting systems. It used a low power laser to look for reflections off of the optics and then sent a high power pulse to burn out the range finder. But it was shelfed as it also blinded snipers and people wearing glasses. The US does follow international rules, despite what some people say.

    4. Re:Laser tank? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're specifically prohibited from using laser designators on targets inside 500 feet so that there is no danger of blinding anyone on the target. Why you'd put an LGB closer then 500 feet from you is, of course, up for discussion.

    5. Re:Laser tank? by earlgrey1 · · Score: 1

      Well, the US military IS interested in developing a Laser truck, although this is more to shoot shells and other sharp objects out of the sky. http://www.theregister.com/2007/07/23/raygun_lorri es_for_us_army/

  62. Re:Just plain cool ??? Just plain stupid by Popsmear · · Score: 1

    Two more words: Americans don't have it

  63. Matrix diffraction grating for computer vision by penapoco · · Score: 1

    I have been trying to make a point-matrix or grid projector starting from a very similar intstructable.

    The only option I found for the optics is this: http://www.novalasers.com/NOVAstore/pc/viewCategor ies.asp?idCategory=6.

    Does anybody know of a better place where to find these kind of optics? (I'm a software guy, I don't know the field very much.)

    That would make it less dangerous and more useful for computer vision experiments and the like.

    By the way, I think the author should have mentioned this other article: http://www.felesmagus.com/pages/lasers-howto.html from which he seems to derive. It also gives you another alternative for the diode casing (DigiKey).

    1. Re:Matrix diffraction grating for computer vision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just add some parts from novarobotics.com and you can make your own Johnny Five!

  64. Blinding lasers are banned. by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 4, Informative

    Such weapons are illegal under the Geneva Convention, as is any other weapon expressly designed only to maim. Laser weapons also have further clarification in the form of The UN Protocol on Blinding Laser Weapons.

    Weapons that do maim are undeniably effective, since it not only deprives your enemy of the soldier, but also the resources required to provide him with medical attention, and to support him when he is no longer able to be productive. Anti-personnel land mines are the chief example of weapons which fall into a grey area here - most of them are potentially lethal, but most often fall short and leave their targets maimed.

    There have been various plans to produce merely incapacitating light-weapons, but in practice, it is difficult to produce a device than can dazzle your opponent without at least some chance of permanent damage.

    1. Re:Blinding lasers are banned. by justinlee37 · · Score: 1

      It strikes me as kind of silly that we'd all get together and settle on the "rules of warfare," instead of just getting together and making warfare itself unlawful.

      War is kind of an all-or-nothing affair, you know?

      I didn't know that bit about laser weapons in the Geneva convention, though. Someone should mod you informative.

      Also, it really says something about the USA that U.S. history classes are mandatory for American high school students, but that I don't remember hearing a single lecture about the Geneva convention in school.

    2. Re:Blinding lasers are banned. by bentcd · · Score: 1

      It strikes me as kind of silly that we'd all get together and settle on the "rules of warfare," instead of just getting together and making warfare itself unlawful. Outlawing warfare will have no effect so no one bothers to try and do it. It is, however, possible to set up some reasonable limitations on warfare and have a number of nations adhere to them, so that is what is being done.
      --
      sigs are hazardous to your health
    3. Re:Blinding lasers are banned. by Maltheus · · Score: 1

      It's not a weapon if you're just using it to hand-scribe your DVDs. Which is of course what any self-respecting geek would be doing with it. ;)

  65. Re:Just plain cool ??? Just plain stupid by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

    Which is only possible with informed consent.

    Telling people, and encouraging them, to do something that is clearly dangerous without warning them of the dangers is utterly irresponsible. I'm amazed this is on the front page of Slashdot. Yes, 90% of "nerds" may technically know that lasers may harm eyesight, but there's the other 10%, not to mention the (probably high) proportion of the 90% that might assume that the lasers being discussed pose less dangers by virtue of the fact someone might post articles encouraging building them without warning them of the high likelihood of accidental blinding themselves.

    Or worse, blinding others.

    --
    You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  66. Meanwhile, back at the White House, a plan develop by MasterOfGoingFaster · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bush: We've go to do something to get rid of all those dangerous hackers.

    Vader: Perhaps we could post a video showing them how to make a dangerous weapon that they would accidentally use on themselves.

    Jobs: Hmmm... there's a dangerous laser in DVD burners.

    Gates: Yeah, let's hope that works better than your plan to make them all deaf with your stupid iPod, or get them run over walking across the street, playing with their iPhone.

    --
    Place nail here >+
  67. Does it have to be a DVD burner... by nxsty · · Score: 2

    Or do you think a DVD reader or CD writer will do?

    1. Re:Does it have to be a DVD burner... by E++99 · · Score: 1

      Don't mess with CD writers, as they use powerful IR lasers, which you can't see and will blind you faster. DVD readers use diodes about the same as a cheap laser pointer.

  68. Sharks with Lasers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, now that the average slashdotter has the ingredients and methology to build a shark with a lasergun, before y'all head out chasing sharks let me stress that this is not yet the holy grail! What is still missing is increasing the sharks brain power by splicing in human genes. Alternatively you can also choose to build an AI unit to connect to the shark brain that does the thinking and implant it.

    1. Re:Sharks with Lasers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that's just what we need... Skynet in the sky and the ocean, too!

  69. Stupid and irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The laser pointer thing was funny for about 15 minutes when they first came out. Now some asshole has gone and given instructions on how to hop one up to the point where it will permanently injure someone in an instant.

    It won't be long before another teenaged asshole entertains themselves by shining it in people's faces at some busy venue. Now you can injure people silently and anonymously. Forget maiming people with real guns; now you can disable them for life by robbing them of their vision.

    Thanks Slashdot, for being morally corrupt and socially irresponsible by posting this information. You, too, can share in the blame for the upcoming surge in permanently damaged vision in innocent persons. Unfortunately, it looks like you stepped over the line in terms of journalistic integrity, so don't be surprised at the price you will have to pay, at a minimum, in terms of your conscience.

    1. Re:Stupid and irresponsible by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Thanks Slashdot, for being morally corrupt and socially irresponsible

      You're welcome.

  70. Red Ryder BB gun by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You'll shoot your eye out kid!

  71. Sticker for sale for all that build this device by Core-Dump · · Score: 0

    Warning, do not look into laser with remaining eye.

    --
    What would you do without a monitor? Sit and look stupid behind a keyboard and a mouse
  72. Re:Is this the most irresponsible thing ever poste by Threni · · Score: 1

    > C'mon, do you really think terrorists need slashdot as a source for weapons?

    I think it's just part of this myth that terrorists are stupid in some way, and that we can give them ideas just by idly posting to Slashdot (or wherever). Clearly this is untrue, otherwise there wouldn't be a problem with terrorism. (The same thing crops up with crime/criminals from time to time).

  73. Great Timing! by MrKaos · · Score: 1
    While I think this is really cool and I want to build one, recently the news reported people outside airports shining lasers into pilots eye's whilst landing a 767 with almost 200 passengers on board. This is probably not a good thing to do to a pilot landing an aircraft and would encourge the more technically adept on /. not to provide these to dolts.

    http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,2 2215301-5005962,00.html

    Definately double plus ungood!!!

    But then a fighter jet aiming a laser at a car is not good either!!!

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
  74. I thought the cat was going to get it by bl8n8r · · Score: 1

    Bad way to start out an article on lasers.

    --
    boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
  75. Darwin by _Shorty-dammit · · Score: 0

    Am I the only one that's getting really sick of people being so unwilling to think for themselves that we need to have 93 warnings on every single product of every imaginable type? So what if you could blind yourself with one of these? If you're stupid enough to build it and shine it in your eye, tough! You deserve to be blind. Protecting the weak from themselves is getting on my nerves. Leave them the hell alone, which would also result in leaving the rest of us the hell alone, too, and whatever will be, will be. If I want to ride a bike nowadays, it is actually illegal for me to do so without a dorky helmet on. When I was a kid on my BMX I'd do all sorts of crazy shit, without any helmet or pads or anything, and I lived. I don't need to be forced to wear a goofy piece of foam on my head when I want to leisurely ride around my 10,000-population town doing absolutely no stunts whatsoever. So what if your kids are borderline retarded and are going to hurt themselves? Too bad for them! They can wear all the safety equipment you force on them for all I care. But that shouldn't mean there should be a law forcing everyone else to do the same. I can take care of myself. If you can't take care of yourself, or learn to do so along the way, too freakin' bad for you. There's a reason for it.

    1. Re:Darwin by MrAngryForNoReason · · Score: 1

      So what if you could blind yourself with one of these? If you're stupid enough to build it and shine it in your eye, tough! You deserve to be blind.

      The problem is the kind of people who are stupid enough to blind themselves are also stupid enough to point one of these at other people. I can't say i'd be thrilled if some moron child (or adult) blinded me waving one around and I certainly don't think *I* deserve it.

    2. Re:Darwin by muellerr1 · · Score: 1

      I think I'm more worried about the borderline retarded kids shining this into other peoples' eyes. If you're stupid or 'weak' enough to blind yourself with it then you will in all likelihood have no problem blinding some innocent bystanders as well, whether those bystanders can think for themselves or not.

      Most of those 93 warning labels aren't there to actually warn you about anything, they're there to reduce the manufacturer's legal exposure to the lawsuits of stupid people. Though in the case of 245mW lasers, you might consider paying attention to them.

      And speaking of Darwin, I'm with you--I'm all for repealing mandatory helmet laws. Just as long as my taxes or increasing health insurance premiums don't have to pay for your long, brain-damaged life. If you don't want to wear one, you clearly don't value what it protects.

    3. Re:Darwin by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Most of those 93 warning labels aren't there to actually warn you about anything, they're there to reduce the manufacturer's legal exposure to the lawsuits of stupid people. Though in the case of 245mW lasers, you might consider paying attention to them.

      I was wondering if I ever injured myself using a product where the one non-intuitive/important warning was #47/93 or so, if I could sue them for FUBARing my S/N ratio, thus eliminating the efficacy of that warning.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
    4. Re:Darwin by Renaissance+2K · · Score: 1

      "Hi, I'm Johnny Knoxville, and this is a homemade laser."

    5. Re:Darwin by Alioth · · Score: 1

      The trouble with this thing is that it can bite you in unexpected ways. You may know not to stare into the beam, like you may know not to look down the barrel of a loaded handgun. But unlike the handgun, you may accidentally aim the beam at something shiny you didn't notice, and it gets reflected back at you - you're blind. Most people, while they may think to not look into the beam - if they have no experience with lasers may not consider that specular reflection can blind them (or some random bystander).

  76. Laser diode may not last too long run like this... by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 5, Informative

    Laser diodes generally require some type of current limiting to prevent damage. In the DVD burner circuit, that is the function of the third pin on the diode package (that the article simply blows off as "not used"). This pin connects to an internal photodiode, which is used to measure output power, and provide feedback through an external driver circuit to continuously control the current applied to the laser diode junction.

    The article simply places the laser diode directly across the 3V battery supply, with not even a ballast resistor to limit the current. You might get away with this with AA batteries, but if someone were to try this trick with a D-cell maglite, they would most likely let the magic smoke out of the laser very quickly.

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  77. RAIL:Redundant array of inexpensive lasers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Can I take multiple cheap lasers and point that at the same point and make a significant power, say to create a laser etcher?

  78. Real Genius by steelclash84 · · Score: 1

    I'm surprised no one has made reference to Val Kilmer yet. "Needless to say, I was a little despondent about the meltdown. But then, in the midst of my preparation for hari-kari, it came to me: it is possible to synthesize excited bromide in an argon matrix. Yes, its an exomer, frozen in its excited state."

    1. Re:Real Genius by BiloxiGeek · · Score: 1

      Which means that building one of these is most likely a "Moral Imperative".

      --
      Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, For you are crunchy and go well with ketchup.
  79. having trouble seeing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Is anyone else having trouble seeing after watching the video?

  80. Adding warning to this entry? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think Slahsdot editors should add a warning to this entry so people won't try this at home?

  81. Re:Is this the most irresponsible thing ever poste by QuantumG · · Score: 1

    Meh. I think it's just evidence that these "terrorists" simply don't exist. The fact that so much "terror" can be generated by anyone with half a brain, and yet virtual none is, shows that the claim that there are people aiming to cause such is false.

    --
    How we know is more important than what we know.
  82. THANK YOU safety people by erroneus · · Score: 1

    Sincerely. I watched the thing before I came here to read the comments and what-not. I'll admit that I was somewhat jazzed to do this one myself... the first thing that popped into my head was zapping people's asses from a distance. :) But the very real threat of blinding someone (accidentally or otherwise) has given me enough pause to not actually do this project. The information is still in my head, of course... I may want to recall this some day when terrorists take over our country or something. But otherwise, I'm generally convinced not to do this... (this may change if a broken DVD writer falls into my hands)

    1. Re:THANK YOU safety people by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think this thing is almost like having instructions to make mustard gas in Slashdot.

  83. Proper protection? by z80kid · · Score: 2, Interesting
    We've all read the 92 posts saying how dangerous this puppy is. How about something more informative?

    Anyone know an inexpensive source for protective gear (ie goggles) for those amateurs who will insist on playing with something like this, but would like to do so responsibly?

    (And thanks to dhalgren for the very helpful Safety FAQ.)

  84. CNC cutter? by SpeedyGonz · · Score: 1

    Parent is absolutely right, period.

    Now, do you think 245 mw is enough to burn through balsa wood?

    I so desire to make a CNC(as in x-y table), non contact cutter to make the wing section ribs for my planes, and now that the laser for that is just one busted DVD burner away from me . . . :D

    With this device, and a personal fabricator like the one in fab @ home We can be frickin' Leo DaVincis :D . . .

    . . . If we don't end blind in the process of making the first one, that is. :(

    1. Re:CNC cutter? by LarsG · · Score: 1

      I kind of doubt it, 0.25W will make a mess of your retina but is a bit on the weak side for cutting. For comparison, industrial CNC lasers are in the 100-3000W range and laser engraving on wood use afaik 5-10W.

      --
      If J.K.R wrote Windows: Puteulanus fenestra mortalis!
    2. Re:CNC cutter? by SpeedyGonz · · Score: 1

      Not even at snail pace? :'(

      I was browsing this guy's site and he uses a several K$ industrial 100w CO2 unit. He cuts 1mm stainless steel though.

      I guess I'll have to attach the dremel with a fine tip to a X-Y table, boooring. :(

    3. Re:CNC cutter? by cwebster · · Score: 1

      dremel? use a plasma cutter.

  85. Or just buy one with similar power by AliasMarlowe · · Score: 2, Informative

    A laser from a DVD burner is 200-250mW or thereabouts. You can legally (in the US, anyway) buy ready-made laser "pointers" of comparable power. For example, wickedlasers.com sells the handheld 200-300mW Spyder II GX green laser with 1.5mm diameter beam and beam divergence below 0.8 mrad. Red lasers up to 125mW and blue lasers up to 30mW are also available.

    No, I don't have one. They're almost certainly illegal in my country.

    --
    Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
  86. If you want to screw yourself, go ahead by anomaly · · Score: 1

    Go ahead and ride your bike with no helmet. I don't care. Here's the deal though. When you blow a tire, hit an obstacle, or fall down and crack your cranium because your head was not protected; don't you DARE be unable to pay EVERY DIME OF YOUR MEDICAL BILLS OUT OF POCKET.

    If you screw up your head and need care for the rest of your life, or care that costs more than your brain-damaged body can earn enough money to pay for because you want to protect your right to not wear a helmet, then you damned well be prepared to take responsibility for your own care.

    You see, if you can't pay, the hospital system eats the cost, which means I pay.

    As long as I have to pay, you can wear the damn helmet thank you very much.

    Your rights STOP when they impact my wallet.

    The fact that you were lucky as a kid is irrelevant. My brother in law did the same stuff you did as a kid and now as an adult still has brain damage and a metal plate in his head. We should have compelled helmets when I was a kid. I'm glad that they are compelled now.

    --
    But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
    1. Re:If you want to screw yourself, go ahead by BLQWME · · Score: 0

      Um, the reason you pay more for health insurance, doctor's bills, etc. is more than what you simply state. Every one in this country knows how poorly handled our health care and legal systems are. And MY RIGHTS do not stop at your wallet. That way of thinking is not acceptable. Using that logic I could limit a lot of people's rights. Using that logic, let's not let anybody who isn't skinny eat fried foods. Heck, if your IQ is lower than 130- you don't get to drive a car because you are going to have a wreck and make my insurance rates increase. Is your IQ higher than 130? -If no, don't drive because you are going to impact my wallet because you are not smart enough to not have a wreck. And yes, I know IQ's don't play a role in traffic accidents (well at least in most cases;). Get off of your high horse and let people be people.

      --
      "Nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you're a hit man or a video gamer"- Jack Thompson
    2. Re:If you want to screw yourself, go ahead by Alioth · · Score: 1

      The trouble is bicycle helmets generally aren't useful (particularly for road riding). For a helmet to be any good at all, it needs to be full face and include neck and temple protection, and protection against "torque" injuries. A bicycle helmet does none of these things - particularly the type of "torque" injury which is the most common type of head injury amongst road cyclists (simplistically, this is where the head is twisted in a collision, causing the brain to bang around inside the skull).

      The head injury rate is actually higher for pedestrians than it is for cyclists, too - should pedestrians be compelled to wear helmets?

      Head injury rates are also higher amongst countries that have high helmet usage amongst cyclists. Helmet usage rates in the United States is around 40%, but the head injury rate is MUCH higher amongst USA cyclists compared to cyclists in the Netherlands - where less than 0.1% of cyclists wear helmets.

    3. Re:If you want to screw yourself, go ahead by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Any idea why that is? I'm wondering if the extra weight of the helmet contributes.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    4. Re:If you want to screw yourself, go ahead by hankwang · · Score: 1

      Supposedly because when you fall sideways and slide with your head over the ground, with a helmet -- especially the fancy ones with ventilation holes everywhere -- there's a fair chance that the helmet catches something and forces your head to turn faster than the brain tissue can follow.

    5. Re:If you want to screw yourself, go ahead by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Ah. I can see that leading to an increase in neck injuries, too.

      I do wonder what the injury stats are for skilled vs unskilled riders? back when I was a kid, everyone was expert on a bicycle, if only from necessity -- it was the only way most kids had to get from point A to point B, other than walking. No nanny expresses back then! No helmets either, and I never heard of anyone getting hurt.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    6. Re:If you want to screw yourself, go ahead by _Shorty-dammit · · Score: 1

      I'm in Canada, I don't pay any medical bills to begin with. Not that I'd ever need to. And I wasn't lucky when I was a kid. I took care of myself. I wanted to ride a bike, so, I learned how to ride a bike. I wanted to learn how to do tricks and stunts, so I did. And consequently learned how to wipe out without killing myself. After all, I couldn't do the trick/stunt properly the very first time I tried it. I had to figure it out. I had to get stronger. I had to get better at riding the bike. When something went wrong, I knew how to save myself from serious injury. That meant lots of skinned palms, knees, bruises, etc. It's called playing. Too bad you never did any of that when you were a kid. Maybe you wouldn't be so uncoordinated and paranoid now. The rest of us kids that were outside playing like kids are supposed to can take care of ourselves just fine, thank you. We don't need you telling us to be careful or we'll kill ourselves. We know what we can and cannot do, and what we should and should not do based on that knowledge. It's riding a bike. It's not riding a motorcycle at 60mph. But thanks for playing the over-protective freak parent role, heh. Your kids won't show any effects of your bizarre parenting at all, promise!

    7. Re:If you want to screw yourself, go ahead by canning · · Score: 1

      In Canada we use paragraphs.

      --
      I love the smell of Karma in the morning
  87. It's all fun and games,,,, by NavyTim · · Score: 1

    ...until someone looses an eye. Another point - If you use a DL-DVD Drive laser - can you take out both eyes at once ?

    --
    Navy Tim www.navytim.com
  88. Laser Safety, Standard Operating Procedures, Gear by mazanoid · · Score: 5, Informative
    Please mod this 5 and tack it up towards the top someone.

    Laser Standard Operating Procedures

    Laser Safety

    Check your particular DVD Rom, chances are fairly good that it's rated as a class I laser (non hazardous, but try not to stare directly at it...because like everything else it's probably made in china I wouldn't be surprised if to save a penny they underclassy the mW output to skip a safety inspection over in the usa heh)

    However, if it's a class II....

    The reason I am offering these links is because I doubt many people know that a class II laser beam will cause eye damage within as little as .026 seconds? 1-2 seconds could be more than enough to cause snow blindness style affects, headaches, and temporary eye tissue scarring?

    I got caught not wearing my ansi rated safety goggles at corning from a light gun and I couldn't see for about 3 days (snow blindness from intense UV exposure for 2 seconds). So let's practice some good sense people.

  89. Re:Just plain cool ??? Just plain stupid by wampus · · Score: 1

    Was it in the middle of Don't Fear the Reaper?

  90. Covering all, erm, *bases*... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You BOTH left out some "All your base..." reference.

    I for one welcome our laser-wielding Soviet Russian overlords who now own all our base, telling use to mark our time and are running Linux on a Beowulf cluster of goggles that do nothing against Natalie Portman covered in hot grits making the first post on a duped story about the Cowboy Neal option for polls. :-P

    1. Re:Covering all, erm, *bases*... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I for one welcome our laser-wielding Soviet Russian Micro$oft Grammar Nazi overlords who now own all our base, telling use to make our time and are running Linux on a Beowulf cluster of goggles that do nothing against AC replies to Natalie Portman covered in hot grits that blend making the first post on a duped story about the Cowboy Neal riding sharks with frickin' lasers on their heads option for polls telling her that she must be new here.

      Fixed for you.

  91. I know about dead optic nerves by halr9000 · · Score: 4, Informative

    [so much for the modding I'd done in this thread.]

    Due to an infection I obtained when I was 2, I've got partial blindness in both eyes. The infection caused scar tissue to form on my retina smack in the good part (center of the optic nerve junction) of my left eye. I can see objects and make out large things but I can't read with that eye at all. Think of it like your peripheral vision. Try this: put a page of text a foot from your ear and try to read it--while looking straight ahead. That's what my vision is like when I close my right eye.

    The right eye has some similar damage, but luckily the scar tissue formed only over a smaller area which is not positioned over the center of the optic nerve junction. So back to the parent's comment about your brain compensating, I can tell you from experience--it depends on how much damage there is. I can read, I can drive and so on, but my brain has to work a bit harder to make a complete image. I don't have 20/20 vision (even with glasses), it's more like 20/50. (I can read text at 20 feet that you can read at 50 feet.) I have to hold things closer to read them than most people, and it's pretty hard to read road signs while driving.

    So the moral to the story is twofold:

    1. Sandboxes are bad, toxoplasmosis bacteria likes to grow there and kids that play in sandboxes inevitably will rub their eyes.
    2. Don't mess with lasers. Holes in your vision--not cool.

    (I almost died laughing when I saw the "donotlookatlaserwithremainingeye" tag. I have a special place in my heart/right-eye for that line.)

  92. Lasik at home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe this can be used to do lasik at home cheap:
    http://www.lasikathome.com/foureasysteps.htm

  93. Re: Just plain stupid - IR lasers are dangerous by E++99 · · Score: 1

    Kids, have a game of soccer instead.... you might actually get a tan and some friends

    Or... see if you can give yourself a tan of your own design with an IR laser!
  94. Re: Just plain stupid - IR lasers are dangerous by E++99 · · Score: 1

    BTW, the article isn't talking about IR lasers. DVD burners use red lasers. CD burners use IR lasers.

  95. Not only brighter than the sun ... by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
    Yes, it really is brighter than the sun.



    Not just that - laser light is also monochromatic, coherent and has a very low divergence (things that don't apply to sunlight). This means that it will be focused into an extremely small spot by a lens (such as the one in your eye, which will ideally focus it into an extremely small spot directly on your fscking retina).

  96. Re:Just plain cool ??? Just plain stupid by Control+Group · · Score: 1

    Sounds to me like the problem is people assuming that anything they read must be safe.

    Perhaps if people didn't abdicate responsibility for the actions ahead of time, we wouldn't have to worry about this. What part of "posted on slashdot" rationally translates to "must be safe to do?"

    Obviously, no part of it. "I was just following orders" was deemed to not be an excuse a long time ago. "It's not my fault, the internet told me to do it" is no better.

    --

    Reality has a conservative bias: it conserves mass, energy, momentum...
  97. Didn't Larry Niven have this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember in some of Larry Niven's books, the characters
    had flashlight lasers. Except, that there was a rotating
    lens that would give you variable beam spread.

  98. Horrible decision to post by irving47 · · Score: 1

    Is it just me or is it really irresponsible for slashdot to link to this story? The last one I remember seeing posted was how to easily get sodium metal... I guess after hitting 30, the part of my brain that recognizes danger is finally fully formed.

    --
    I had a sucky sig.
  99. Death star laser array by ipooptoomuch · · Score: 1

    What will happen if I put 8 of these in a death star-esque laser array and point them all at the same place. Because I am thinking about doing this :)

  100. more video by kbaud · · Score: 1

    Here's another 100mw from a DVD burner starting a fire (with the help of some gun powder). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RS_nF7t6feE

  101. Re:Is this the most irresponsible thing ever poste by edunbar93 · · Score: 1

    Honestly, I don't care about terrorists. I'm worried about shithead 13 year old boys who wouldn't think once about using this for practical jokes. But hey, Slashdot is only reporting this, not making it up.

    --
    "No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
  102. Warning Label by imp · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Clearly, there needs to be a warning label:

    "DO NOT LOOK INTO LASER WITH REMAINING EYE"

    On this device and instructions.

  103. Hologram by chriso11 · · Score: 1

    I believe it depends on the coherence length of the laser. The coherence length defines how large an object you can make a hologram.

    --
    No, I don't trust in god. He'll have to pay up front, like everybody else.
  104. Eye protection by phorm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A lot of people here have mentioned how dangerous this laser is in terms of the ability to fry eyes and/or cause blindness. Is there anyone here who can indicate what the proper safety gear would be when dealing with lasers of this variety? I'm guessing that anti-UV sun-glasses aren't quite good enough... and welders goggles perhaps a bit too dark to accomplish any work?

    1. Re:Eye protection by Sans_A_Cause · · Score: 1

      There are safety glasses with specific wavelength filters for working with lasers. You can get them from just about any scientific supply company.

    2. Re:Eye protection by phorm · · Score: 1

      I was just talking to a co-worker about this. As expected, one thing to keep in mind would be that with different lasers there are different filters for eye protection (for all the other readers out there wanting to play with lasers).

    3. Re:Eye protection by bl8n8r · · Score: 1

      use a web-cam to work on it and watch the monitor with your eyes, not the laser.

      --
      boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
  105. MOMMY! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Funny
    The mods are smoking crack in the morning again!

    informative?

    Funny, mayhaps. But informative? No.

    God have mercy on their heathen souls.

    --
    Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    1. Re:MOMMY! by dintech · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's important to be made aware of the mind control tactics used by our government. The only problem I've had with them is that I'm not sure if the contact lenses work or not.

    2. Re:MOMMY! by E++99 · · Score: 3, Funny

      It's important to be made aware of the mind control tactics used by our government. The only problem I've had with them is that I'm not sure if the contact lenses work or not.

      That's why you should just stick with tin foil. Everyone knows that works. Believe me, if the government mind control was working on me, I'd know about it! But I have to go now -- I like to get my quarterly estimated income taxes paid nice and early.
    3. Re:MOMMY! by Loligo · · Score: 1

      Tinfoil contact lenses sound REALLY painful and hard to see through.

      (and to hell with the slashdot reply timer that punishes those of us that learned how to frickin TYPE)

  106. OMG Airplane Security by andi75 · · Score: 1

    Great, now we'll be forbidden to board a plane with

    - a pocket flashlight
    - a discman
    - a laptop with a CD/DVD drive

    because it could be used as a weapon. Welcome to the world of airport security.

    1. Re:OMG Airplane Security by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I got on a plane with my 25mW laser twice in the last month. The screeners didn't even blink as my bag went through.

  107. Re:Laser diode may not last too long run like this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    In general, yes, in this particular case - no. Diodes meant for DVD burners typically don't have a feedback diode (These things are supposed to be run closed-loop with the read sensor). Also, these things are actually rated for even higher peak powers - a 130mW continuous laser is spec'd to run at 300mW for pulses, and will run even higher if you don't mind killing it faster. The short of it is that these things seem to be "relatively" robust to catastrophic optical damage (i.e. smoked mirror), but do need some serious heatsinking.

    Ref: HL6545MG Hitachi laser diode
    http://www.photonic-products.com/products/laserdio des_visible/hitachi_visible_ds/hl6545mg.pdf

  108. What other dumb advice can we post? by ChrisA90278 · · Score: 1

    Did you know that if you break of the head of a gizillion wooden matches and stuff them into a glass bottle you cam make a rocket? Well maybe. But on the other hand you will likely loose both eyes and both hands trying to get this to work.

    What other great advice can we post... Here's one. Remember you mother telling you not to cross the street if you see a car coming? Here a loop hole. Close your eyes. If you cover your eyes you will never see a car coming so it will be OK to cross the street.

    I've heard you can put a cigarette out by dunking it in a cup on gasoline. If you do it fast enough the gas will suck the heat out of the flame before the cigarette has time to vaporize and ignite the gas. It's all about timing and being quick.

    Five out of six Russian Roulette players "win". Your changes are pretty good.

    Compared to the above the laser trick sounds safe. Blind in one eye is not nearly so bad as being covered with burning gasoline or a bullet through the head,

    1. Re:What other dumb advice can we post? by hashmap · · Score: 1

      Compared to the above the laser trick sounds safe. Blind in one eye is not nearly so bad as being covered with burning gasoline or a bullet through the head,

      one main difference being that you can easily blind someone else by pointing this device in random directions ... imagine going blind because an idiot down the street decided to put this together and now wants to see how far it tracks

      this stupid device has the potential to blind someone a mile away ... far more damaging to others than other jackass style stunts that are only dangerous to the pursuer himself. I too hate the disclaimers of the form Suit does not actually flybut when you easily damage others the issue is far more serious

  109. Re:Dangerous, arrr by tepisch · · Score: 1

    and we need more pirates anyway. Mod this insightful. THIS is how to deal with global warming. Err, "climate change."

    Ramen.

  110. GOGGLES!!! by Wizard+Drongo · · Score: 1

    Also, remember kiddies, if you want to be able to see, buy some goggles: http://www.wickedlasers.com/Goggles-16-1.html $39 ain't that expensive when it comes to being able to see!

    --
    The truth shall always be free: Boris Floricic is Tron.
  111. Energy Density by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 1

    The key is the energy density, not the total amount of energy. Sunlight can't light a match normally but focus it with a magnifying glass and it is no problem at all.

  112. Please cue... by HeavyDevelopment · · Score: 1

    The "sharks with lasers" jokes.

    --
    Badges!?! We don't need no stinking badges!
  113. Slashdot might get sued over this post. by zootjeff · · Score: 1

    The American public is sure to do this, and is sure to cause an accident. With 80,000 slashdot hits, this is sure to cause a liability. When I was in 8th grade I made a stun gun, at that age I was not able to comprehend the potential for permanent eye damage. I would pull this article.

  114. What the hell kind of geeks ARE we? by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

    400+ comments and no one's made a comment about how we can now build The Master's Laser Screwdriver?

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
  115. Why use a BB gun? by wsanders · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just hit 'em with a hammer!

    SAFETY WARNING: Don't hit bullets with hammers!!

    SECOND SAFETY WARNING: Because hitting a bullet with a hammer can cause it to explode!!

    THIRD SAFETY WARNING: A bullet moves very fast and can kill or injure anything in its path!!!

    FOURTH SAFETY WARNING: YOU COULD EVEN YOUR EYE OUT DOING THIS!

    --
    Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
    1. Re:Why use a BB gun? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 3, Funny

      FOURTH SAFETY WARNING: YOU COULD EVEN YOUR EYE OUT DOING THIS!
      So it's a cure for being crosseyed? Someone get Navin R. Johnson on the phone!
      --
      Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    2. Re:Why use a BB gun? by MrNiceguy_KS · · Score: 1

      No, he means it will "even out" your eye to match the vision in the other eye. You know, the one you used to look into the home-made laser.

      --
      Redundancy is good And also good.
    3. Re:Why use a BB gun? by wsanders · · Score: 1

      Damn, I blew the punch line. There obviously is a bug in Firefox that selectively deletes words from the text box the "Submit" button is pressed.

      See what I mean!?

      --
      Give a man a fish and you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish, and he'll say "WHERE'S MY FISH, YOU IDIOT?"
  116. Re:Laser Safety, Standard Operating Procedures, Ge by alienw · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The optical DRIVE is class I, because it's enclosed by a metal box and has interlocks, thus posing no danger if operated normally. The diode inside can be class II, III, IV, or whatever. Every DVD drive would have similar power output, since that's what it takes to burn DVDs.

  117. Not really... by PalmKiller · · Score: 1

    A short flash in the eye is not gonna blind you. You will likely close your eyes or look away way before any real permanent damage is done. Most of those warnings on lasers are a little on the overkill side...mostly for the really really stupid people that would force themselves to stare into painful laser light for amusement.

    1. Re:Not really... by PalmKiller · · Score: 1

      That being said...if it were a bigger commercial laser, it would be a different issue entirely...in that case yes it might cause serious permanent damage unless you are rushed to a knowledgeable emergency facility in which case it might be minimized.

    2. Re:Not really... by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      A short flash in the eye is not gonna blind you.

      Where did you get this information ? Did you pull it out of ... no, I don't want to know.

      You will likely close your eyes or look away way before any real permanent damage is done.

      Good luck closing your eye in less than 10 milliseconds.

      The blinking reflex will only protect your eyes if the lasers power is less than 1 mW.

    3. Re:Not really... by PalmKiller · · Score: 1

      Um, well, I got that from personal experience with similar rated continuous output lasers (though they were not solid state), back in my college days playing in the lab making holograms. I do however have a tiny dead spot on my right retina from a laser blast according to vision fields tests and retina photos, but I am certainly not blind.

    4. Re:Not really... by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      I do however have a tiny dead spot on my right retina from a laser blast according to vision fields tests and retina photos, but I am certainly not blind.

      I'd take completely undamaged vision over an even slightly damaged one every day.

      The kinds of damage that are permanent and irreparable are best avoided completely.

    5. Re:Not really... by PalmKiller · · Score: 1

      Oh I certainly agree with that one, its best to not look into a laser of any sort...even if they say its safe, depending on how its focused even the really low power ones can harm you. My point was that something like that would not necessarily be as serious as it was being hyped up to be. While my eye damage shows up on field of vision tests and photos, I don't normally notice it unless I make myself aware of it...so I think my brain compensates for the loss pretty well.

  118. Re:Is this the most irresponsible thing ever poste by Deagol · · Score: 1
    The world has more to worry about than what's described in the article. I just recently visited an airport, after not being at one for a good while. Apparently shampoo, bottles of water, and shoes are dangerous. Those items are *much* easier to find than jury rigging a pocket laser.

    I swear, the US is turning into a country of emasculated pansies. We defeated England (with help), then Germany and Japan (again, with help), and stood nose-to-nose with the USSR for years, but we now duck and cover if you bring more than 3 fl. oz. of liquids onto a plane! How sad is that?

    But, back on topic... Very cool hardware hack. We need someone to rig up an array of these enclosed in a box for a super-fast oven: Block of ice to boeuf bourguignon in eight seconds.

  119. Retinal damage by Reziac · · Score: 1

    It's not the surface structures of the eye we're worrying about here; it's the extremely delicate retina -- the part of the eye that actually takes the "impact" of incoming light. The frontal structures (cornea, lens) are meant to *transmit* light, and are considerably tougher as well.

    Don't think it's a risk? I have a small blind spot in one eye from being momentarily caught square-on by a supermarket scanning laser.

    --
    ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
  120. Not sure by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 1

    Depends on a few different things such as what kind of lens it has and what sort of sensor it uses. My guess is you could damage it in fairly sort order. I don't know that you'd completely burn it out but you could burn a blind spot in it rather quickly.

    If you are really interested, I'd get a cheap CCD camera and try. Just order a cheapie security camera (you can get them for less than $100) hook it up to your TV and lase the thing, see what happens.

  121. for erections lasting longer than 4 hours..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As does Viagra.

  122. Re:Meanwhile, back at the White House, a plan deve by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Vader does not belong in that group of people.

    Vader was openly against people. He did not hide it. He did not pretend to be doing things for the good of the people.

    Vader is the kind of enemy you can respect. He does what he does and does not make excuses or apologies. He also tells the truth. The most devious of enemies will always tell the truth, as everyone thinks they are lying.

    The others are all deceitful. They lie when they can. They try to manipulate you for their own gain.

  123. (Plasma Cutter + Balsa Wood) == Smoke by SpeedyGonz · · Score: 1

    dremel? use a plasma cutter.

    A plasma torch to cut a 1/8 plank of balsa wood??????
    Like bringing a Ferrari Enzo to compete in a go-kart championship, maybe?

  124. Wow CIA doesn't need cigarettes anymore.... by bodland · · Score: 1

    "Care a for a cigarette old man?"

  125. Just upped the "clench factor" by glhturbo · · Score: 1

    One night, as I was driving along a crowded highway with my wife and kids in the car, a red dot scanned across my dashboard, assumedly from the car driving next to me. Not knowing if it was some idiot kid with a pointer, or some psycho with an AimPoint, I clenched so hard that a head-on collision wouldn't have dislodged me.

    Now I have to worry about THIS too?!!?! What a world...

    I'm not worried about blinding myself, as I would NEVER attempt to make this. I'm worried about someone showing my son and saying "look here"....

    (And although I do agree that information -- including the usual bomb-making stuff -- is not harmful in and of itself, I do sometimes wish not so many people knew about it :-( )

  126. Re: Just plain stupid - IR lasers are dangerous by flayzernax · · Score: 1

    I agree wholeheartedly with your comment. But the person I was responded to literally "flamed" or "attacked" the slashdot editors. There have been MANY other posts expounding on the dangers of lasers, and laser safety already in these comments that sufficiently argue the point. Perhaps I was in err and should have been less sarcastic and said: "I do not think the editors are intentionally trying to blind people, perhaps simply suggesting that they provide a warning with the article that sufficiently portrays the danger involved in using these lasers would have been more appropriate." But sarcasm and cynicism is the mode of speech that I favor =P I think any rational sane human being would have looked at my comment and realized I was being facetious. I do not pander to the ignorant. All hail the Laser Shark Overlords (******kids please do not attach these to the sharks at the local aquarium, you could blind yourself, others, and oppress the human race, as well as get bitten by a shark, or possibly maimed and killed********).

  127. Filtering by hax0r_this · · Score: 1

    I just use a V Chip for that.

  128. Looks like lots of fun - but by Whuffo · · Score: 2, Informative
    Please - if you build one of these you need to be aware of the EXTREME DANGER involved in playing with this little toy.

    If you shine the beam into your eye - on purpose, by accident - or by bouncing it off of something shiny, it will burn holes in your retina. That's not "may" that's "will". We're talking about permanent eye damage, the kind that makes people blind.

    Operating one of these in your house or outdoors is dangerous not only to yourself but to others. Our world is full of shiny things; even imperfect "mirrors" can reflect enough beam energy to harm yourself or an innocent bystander; just one quick "flash" sighting of the beam's reflection is enough to cause permanent eye damage.

    I know that there's too many of you who will say "it'll never happen to me" and go happily waving your new super laser pointer around. I have one helpful tip for you: if you have a "wow, that's bright!" experience followed by things getting darker - get yourself to the hospital RIGHT NOW and tell them you got a look at a class IIIb laser. They'll know what to do and can probably save your eye if you get there soon enough.

    Laser safety goggles are a great idea - but only if you're playing with your laser indoors in a room with all windows covered and all shiny / reflective things removed or covered. If you take it outdoors and start waving it around, someone's going to get hurt.

  129. sweet by oudzeeman · · Score: 1

    now I just need to figure out how to turn my cat into a shark

  130. Reminds me of Christmas Story... by Octopus · · Score: 1

    "You'll shoot your eye out, kid!"

  131. The most dangerous thing in the universe is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...life, there is 100% propability of dying.

  132. Shall we ban DVD burners outright, then, by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 1

    or just require a permit and registration before purchase?

    Should we ban CRT displays because you can use the flyback transformer to build a stun gun?

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    1. Re:Shall we ban DVD burners outright, then, by Das+Modell · · Score: 1

      Your argument doesn't make any sense. You may as well argue that we should ban electricity because someone could get electrocuted. Idiotic.

    2. Re:Shall we ban DVD burners outright, then, by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 1

      My point is that potentially eye-damaging lasers are already freely available to anyone who wants them--in the form of a DVD burner. The level of technical skill needed to pull off the "conversion" described in the article is so low that it presents little practical barrier to anyone who wants such a laser for nefarious purposes.

      MANY common consumer items contain parts that could be used to construct potentially hazardous devices. Given the wide availability of such components (and no practical hope of ever changing this), it would seem that there are only 2 courses of action:

      1:) Create new laws in an attempt to suppress the INFORMATION needed to build such devices.

      2:) Enforce existing laws prohibiting the use of dangerous weapons against people and property.

      Given the moral and practical arguments against option "A", I'll go with "B".

      --
      Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
    3. Re:Shall we ban DVD burners outright, then, by Das+Modell · · Score: 1

      Or maybe you're being hysterical. I said nothing about DVD burners.

  133. Re:Is this the most irresponsible thing ever poste by DrCode · · Score: 1

    I'm with you there. Someone will be driving down the freeway, or walking through a mall, suddenly see a flash of light, and find they've lost a big part of their vision, 'cause some kids were playing around with one of these.

  134. Yup, fun by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

    In high school a buddy of mine was the son of a chemistry teacher and we managed to buy at the university supply shop by piggybacking on the school's purchases.

    Potassium chlorate, white phosphorus, concentrated sulfuric and nitric acid... No problem.

    You get my drift. I'd be so in jail these days.

    Good old 70s... No surprise that no kids are interested in science any more. He became a chemist but I discovered computers a few years later.

  135. Worst Idea... Evar... by idontgno · · Score: 1

    DIY directed energy weapons projects on /.

    C'mon folks, there's a fine line between casemodding and the Anarchist's Cookbook, and we just flew way the Hell over it.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
  136. Warning. by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 3, Funny

    Visible means little when you're blind.

    Warning: Do not look into LASER with remaining eye.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  137. Cheating by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Thats cheating with a black balloon, i'd like to see it with a white one, lol ;-)

  138. Big gaping loophole by LionMage · · Score: 1
    Note, though, Article 3 of the linked Protocol:

    Blinding as an incidental or collateral effect of the legitimate military employment of laser systems, including laser systems used against optical equipment, is not covered by the prohibition of this Protocol.
    This means that, for example, targeting lasers mounted on tanks are perfectly fine to have. And although said targeting lasers are supposed to be used for things like laser-guided missiles and other ordnance, I have been told by some buddies who served in the Army that they were told how to use the targeting laser as a weapon in battlefield tactics. It's apparently great for blinding enemy infantry, etc.

    One of my buddies was partially blinded during a training accident involving a tank-mounted targeting laser. (Protective goggles were not securely fastened in place when some goober fired up the laser, wouldn't ya know.) He's recovered a good percentage of his vision, but color remains a problem for him; unfortunately, since he's an artist, he now has to rely on friends to pick his prismacolor markers for him when he's doing coloring work.
  139. Johnny 8-in-1 by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

    Back in the 50s or so, during the cold-war spy movie craze, there was a Mattel toy called a "Johnny 7-in-1". This was a little briefcase with pieces of a toy gun that could be assembled into seven different toy weapons for playing spy/saboteur.

    Then the crooks in Detroit figured out that it was also able to fire a 20-guage shotgun shell (once) without blowing up. And it became "the weapon of choice" for stickups for a few months.

    --
    Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
    1. Re:Johnny 8-in-1 by Ungrounded+Lightning · · Score: 1

      Proper name: "Johnny Seven O.M.A." (for one-man-army).

      Urban Myth Caveat: I heard about the eighth function from a friend in the gun culture but did not witness or attempt it myself. B-)

      --
      Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
  140. Re:Meanwhile, back at the White House, a plan deve by $uperjay · · Score: 1

    An American president will be blinded by a laser-flashlight before the decade ends. Easily. You know it's going to happen.

  141. an important warning on laser classes by petermgreen · · Score: 1

    the class of a laser product is not the same thing as the class of the laser inside. Afaict if the laser is completely enclosed then the product is class 1 regardless of the class of the laser inside.

    from the power of this laser it sounds like the laser itself is well into the class III range even though the product is class I (the product in question being a DVD burner).

    --
    note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  142. Update: 07/09 12:23 GMT by KD by Trogre · · Score: 1

    Update: 07/09 12:23 GMT by KD

    So, was this updated on 7 September or 9 July? I suspect the update script is a bit, well, wrong.

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
  143. Suck it Scissors by mgburr · · Score: 1

    Running with scissors finally comes into the 21st century.

  144. bicycle helmets by hankwang · · Score: 1

    I don't have stats, but in Amsterdam we consider tourists on rental bikes to be rather dangerous. :) I've lost balance at high speed (30+ km/h) a couple of times and once had a collision with a car that launched my body across the street. All times without even touching my heads and just a few scratches and bruises. The trick is to convert the momentum into a rolling motion rather than trying to absorb it with your arms. I developed reflexes for falling in the judo martial arts lessons I had as a kid. It probably wouldn't help me in a frontal collision with a car or, worse, SUV.

    See also Some links on bicycle helmet safety

  145. do you read? by anomaly · · Score: 1

    Not paying medical bills yourself decreases a sense of personal responsibility for risk taking activities. Glad the state is taking away your accountability. That will make for a hardy people group up north.

    Do you read? My brother in law "played" as you described, and has brain damage! The fact that you didn't sustain a serious injury is fortuitous for you, but I don't think that society should count on luck.

    --
    But Herr Heisenberg, how does the electron know when I'm looking?
  146. Avex DVD to Mobile Converter by jackson191 · · Score: 1

    Avex DVD to Mobile Converter converts DVD movies to Mobile Phone 3GP format and let you watch mobile movies on the road. Support all mobile phones with 3GP video capability. The software is very easy to use. www.mobile-video-converter.com/dvd-to-mobile

  147. informative ?!?!? by freaker_TuC · · Score: 1

    Whoever has modded these subliminal blocker-lenses informative should be controlled immediately and report at hangar 52! thanks!

    This won't hurt a bit... I promise ..

    --
    --- I am known for the ones who want to find me on the net. Is that a privacy risk or a privilege? One might wonder..