Slashdot Mirror
Hardware Hackers Create a Cheaper Bedazzler
ptorrone writes "Hardware hacker extraordinaires Ladyada (Adafruit Industries) and Phil Torrone (of MAKE magazine) have just published an open source 'Homeland Security' project, a non-lethal LED-Based Incapacitator: THE BEDAZZLER. After attending a conference where the $1 million 'sea-sick flashlight' (THE DAZZLER) was demoed by Homeland Security, the duo decided to created an under-$250 version, and just released the source code, schematics and PCB files. The team also released a 5 minute video describing the 'official version' as well as how they created the 'open source hardware' version."
brilliant !
Next project: under-$250 LHC.
It may be 7 digits, but at least it's a semiprime
$250, huh? This:
https://www.mybedazzler.com/
certainly nauseates me for a lot less!
At the end of the video, the creator uses it on a test subject and it doesn't work - which she even admits.
"Ok, so it turns out it doesn't work so well. But it's great for raves."
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
When you look up how to make something you can always make it cheaper and easier than if you had to figure it out on your own. A large part of the cost was paying the people that make and test the device without knowing how it should be made.
Watching the video, at the end of their demonstration, she says, "Well, turns out it doesn't work that well, but it is great for raves." I'm not accusing them of shenanigans, because they're not misrepresenting that it actually works. However, I am accusing the submitter of exaggerating the effectiveness of this thing by calling it a "cheaper Bedazzler."
It's not like they have recreated for $250 what the DHS did for a million. I don't doubt that what they've created is irritating to look at, but the thing is five times the size of what the DHS had created for them, and would be totally ineffective in an actual situation in which it would be needed.
But she's right, it probably would be kind of fun at a party, and it does look like a neat project to play around with.
if homeland security (ostensibly a government entity) spent the money to develop it, is it patentable?
When I hear BEDAZZLER, in my head I hear a Infotainment show host voice. He continues by telling me how easy it is to attach colourful rhinestones to my own clothes and fabrics at home, for only $19.99 plus postage and packing.
You can advertise in this sig from as little as £99.99 a month!
IT REALLY WORKS!!! I actually felt nausea when I realized that they spent a million of our tax dollars designing a fucking party favor!
I thought a Bedazzler was one of those things sold on TV that lets girls add rhinestones to clothing, so when I read the summary I was really curious what the Dept of Homeland Security was doing with them.
Yes. Unlike copyrights, the government can (and does) own patent rights. When the government funds the work giving rise to the patents, the contractor (or university) will own the patent, but the government actually get a non-exclusive right to the patent. See Bayh-Dole, 35 U.S.C. Sec. 200 et. seq.
When Bayh-Dole applies, the owning entity then has an obligation to actually exploit the invention. If they don't the government has "march-in" rights that would let the government take ownership. Not that that's ever happened.
I think the idea was, "It doesn't work, but it's still pretty neat."
Keep in mind that she never said, "This is as effective as the DAZZLER." That was the nominal goal, and at the end, she clearly states that they didn't get there. But I really don't think they expected to replicate a million-dollar device.
Sometimes, the cool stuff that comes out of making something like this isn't whether or not in the end it actually works or is as effective as you want it to be, but what you learn along the way and what you do end up with. (In this case, a device that is cool at raves.)
The submitted did submit it under a somewhat misleading title, though, in implying that the thing actually works.
There are some dirty cops. The problem is not really how many dirty cops there are. The problem is the cops that aren't really dirty but will back up the dirty cops. If the "Honest Cops" would get real honest and bust the dirty bastards then things would be much better. Till that happens ALL FUCKING COPS SUCK ASS! If you aren't turning in bad cops you are one. PERIOD!
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Theres no schematics in the patent. The flashblinding effect was documented over 100 years ago by scientists like Bruke and Broca. There's really nothing very complex going on, its a green flashing light at about 8-10 Hz...which makes it a great intro-to-Arduino project! :)
To a cop there are three kinds of people: Cops, cops' families, and suspects.
Free Martian Whores!
Back in the late 60's I worked on a program at General Electric, Utica, NY called LAMPS. The technology consisted of very bright strobe lights flashing in the 8 Hz - 10 Hz region. These lights were flown in aircraft and used in the Vietnam war to disorient the enemy. The strobe frequency is unique in that it disrupts brain wave activity that caused the enemy target to loose control of bodily functions (not just vomiting).
We did our testing at night and the lights could be seen from a nearby highway. This resulted in multiple auto accidents.
I get a huge kick out of the fact that the name is a likely play on the X-Men hero "Dazzler", who used light to disorient people.
Or it could be that the name is a likely play on the word "dazzle", as in "to lose clear vision especially from looking at bright light", but your guess is good too...
Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
I'd call them "dirty cops". Sadly there are far too many, but not all cops are.
"Dirty" cops are a subset of the problem. They are the corrupt ones who misuse their position as law enforcement for their own gains or play along when officials above them do the same. It is a problem. I agree that not all cops are dirty.
There are also cops who are not corrupt but still fail to "protect and serve". Some are un-necessarily brutal. This ranges from beating up suspects who offer no resistance (until it became clear they would be beaten up), perhaps for a minor technical infraction. In some cases, people who have done nothing wrong at all (however minor) end up on the wrong side of a beat down.
Others don't cross that line but have obviously forgotten that their job is to "protect and serve" not to be treated with the sort of deference that used to be reserved for Chinese emperors. They are the ones who seem to take personal offense if they can't find something you did wrong so they can write you a ticket. They "thought they saw a beer" and when proven wrong, keep looking for something else. They ooze the attitude that you serve them and they will GET you one way or another. If there's actually nothing at all, even a technicality, they can write you up on, they will "let you off with a verbal warning" rather than just apologize for the inconvenience. Yes, I know it's awkward to accuse someone and then find that your wrong. That's WHY an apology is in order. Your best hope is that the other person will accept it graciously. It would be a lot less awkward for them if they hadn't subvocally appended "you dirty little sack of shit" to everything they said to you before being proven wrong.
Next on the list we have those who somehow enable the above categories. They treat what would otherwise be considered a brutal assault worth not less than a year in prison as "some kind of mis-understanding" (yeah, the mother of two didn't understand that she might get yanked out of the car by her hair and kicked in the ribs if she pulled over like the law says she must for a minor traffic stop) and do nothing significant about it. They missed the part of kindergarten where we learned about saying you're sorry. They might reluctantly admit that some officer's actions were out of line but you can actually tell from the attitude they project that in their minds they're sure the victim was guilty of something and somehow managed to put one over on the bleeding hearts.
While only one category above is "dirty cops", all are unambiguously "pigs". They are the ones that make cops unwelcome in a neighborhood. They are NOT by any means 100% of the police force, but the odds that any particular cop approaching you is one of those are high enough to tempt even the most law abiding citizen attempt to avoid the encounter. They make parents think twice before advising their children to go to a cop if there's a problem. Some of them are decent enough when they're NOT on duty (to the point that friends and family would be shocked to see their on duty behaviour).
The remainder are "police officers". They are what 100% of the police force needs to be made up of. They are, of course, imperfect human beings like the rest of us but they acknowledge that and try to get it right anyway (just like most of us). Because they can acknowledge that they are imperfect human beings, they are able to understand that the rest of us are as well and act accordingly. They can even understand the concept of "no harm, no foul" in spite of laws written in black and white (by imperfect human beings).
The big problem they face is that it doesn't take many "pigs" amongst the "police officers" to make it in an honest citizen's best interest to assume the worst. It takes even fewer to be a problem for honest citizens legally doing things that are politically inconvenient (like protesting). When the problems are higher up the chain of command there may be little or nothing a proper "police officer" can do about it.
It is because of all of that that cops as a whole come to be regarded as "the pigs".
Don't worry, its plenty bright! Its bigger only because it has more LEDs, and nice 6 degree lenses. If you RTFA you'll see we suggest going with green LEDs for best effectiveness but this has an RGB rave mode for going to parties. That way we can take it out to raves! Also, please note that LEDs are not driven "continuous current" not sure where you got that from
And yet, when you get in trouble, your first call will be to 911 and the first responder will most likely be a police officer who will try and help you or your family in any way he can.
I'll order a pizza instead. The pizza guy will show up sooner, might actually help, and is less likely to hassle me instead. Cops are good for providing paperwork required by insurance companies, and little else.
Pardom me if I have nothing but contempt for cops, but I have seriously been in a situation where I (as a pizza guy) had just been robbed, was still bleeding, and the cop hassled me for consuming his valuable time with my problems, called me stupid for delivering pizza to that neighborhood, and then gave me a ticket for some some expired sticker. Oh, and made sure to get free pizza from the restaurant.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.