Slashdot Mirror


Light Barrier Repels Mosquitoes

kodiaktau writes "Dr. Szabolcs Marka has received one of five $1M grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to continue his experiments with using light beams to create mosquito barriers. This is the second grant he has received from the foundation and proves to be a deviation from the previous and more dangerous use of lasers to control mosquitoes. A video of the light barrier in action can be seen here"

135 comments

  1. [Citation Needed] - laser mosquito control danger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What was it about the laser mosquito control that was dangerous? I can't find anything on this in either TFA or Google.

    Obviously, we all fear lasers are just dangerous in general, especially if they're powerful enough to vaporize something as substantial as a structural portion of a mosquito's wing. But that system was supposed to be precise enough to tell what species and gender of mosquito it was looking at; that didn't sound to me like it was going to be a real eye hazard. So I presume there was some other risk that's less obvious?

    If not, I believe this is an example of "begging the question", or something very close to it.

  2. Adaptation... by Joce640k · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Won't the mosquitoes just adapt to ignore this 'barrier'?

    I figure this will work for a year or so, tops. The evolutionary rewards for getting past it are huge.

    --
    No sig today...
    1. Re:Adaptation... by jovius · · Score: 1

      It depends how important a resource humans are for mosquitoes. Mosquitoes have not learnt to bite through nets either or stand insect repellants.

    2. Re:Adaptation... by Sqr(twg) · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You could make evolution work for you by putting death traps behind light barriers at mosquito breeding grounds.

    3. Re:Adaptation... by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      Never seen repellant-resistant mosquitoes have ya? Clearly you've never lived near swamp land. I'll give you the rest of that point though.

    4. Re:Adaptation... by Solandri · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If people were the main source of nourishment for mosquitoes, then yes. But they're not. If you use this to discourage mosquitoes from biting humans, they will happily get blood from other animals, resulting in no evolutionary pressure to pass light barriers.

    5. Re:Adaptation... by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Never seen repellant-resistant mosquitoes have ya? Clearly you've never lived near swamp land. I'll give you the rest of that point though.

      I won't. Evolution doesn't do massive steps, only small ones.

      --
      No sig today...
    6. Re:Adaptation... by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Fruits and nectars are the main source of nourishment for mosquitoes. They only need the blood to make eggs.

      --
      No sig today...
    7. Re:Adaptation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Since they're able to feed on anything with blood (cattle, dogs, cats, rodents etc) it probably won't affect their diet too much.

    8. Re:Adaptation... by SharpFang · · Score: 1

      There are other methods of adaptation than circumventing another barrier. There are so many species of animals who are not nearly as resilient in defending against mosquitoes as humans, and provide perfectly good blood. Mosquitoes can just adapt by choosing not to bite humans and pick easier victims instead.

      --
      45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
    9. Re:Adaptation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Won't the mosquitoes just adapt to ignore this 'barrier'?
      Animals are easier targets. Let's hope at least about 100 years.

      Hungarian scientists in the news. Yeah!

    10. Re:Adaptation... by adolf · · Score: 1

      Which, if I am not mistaken, is the same as saying "they need blood to survive."

    11. Re:Adaptation... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Nope, They have not evolved to adapt to the spraying of Garlic oil for mosquito control over the past 200 years, so It's highly doubtful that they will get together and rapidly evolve to overcome this. They also have not evolved to defeat the highly effective mosquito traps.

      Contrary to your belief, they do not have a science council or war council to work on their war against humanity. and evolution takes a lot more time.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    12. Re:Adaptation... by Gideon+Wells · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Depends. I built fences for farms for a while. One of the things the older folk told me was that you cannot build a perfect anti-deer fence so they settled for a three to five foot fence normally. They had tails of deer jumping these electrified fences. Once they had a deer jump "through" the individuals wires to get inside.

      Why were these easily bypassed fences used? They weren't to stop deer, but discourage them. One farmer builds a fence, the deer go to his neighbor. His neighbor builds a fence, they move to the next least annoying place to go. May sound harsh, but the deer here were reintroduced from a non-native variety from the Mid-west. Only in the last ten-twenty years have the natural predators began making enough of a comeback to control the population beyond hunting season.

      The mosquitos will likely the same. A few might adapt, but since this isn't killing the non-adpators there won't be any genetic favor towards the adapters. A percentage of mosquitoes is better than the current amount.

      --
      by Anonymous Coward: I, for one, welcome the shift from car analogies to pizza analogies. um.. overlords?
    13. Re:Adaptation... by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

      I won't.

      Just search "repellant-resistant mosquitoes" on Google. That's not very complex. And you will learn a lot, such as how many generations are needed for insects to adapt to a repellent.

      Evolution doesn't do massive steps, only small ones.

      Where did you read that exactly? Are you a creationist trying to discredit evolution? It sure looks like you are. That, and the fact that you make the assumption that adapting to a repellent is a massive step. How did you get there?

      Anyways, your argument is sufficiently discredited by facts to spend times arguing about it.

    14. Re:Adaptation... by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

      Which, if I am not mistaken, is the same as saying "they need blood to survive as a species."

      FTFY.

    15. Re:Adaptation... by Muad'Dave · · Score: 3, Funny

      They had tails of deer jumping these electrified fences.

      You built fences that would rip the tails off of deer that attempted to jump over them? How cruel!

      Oh, you meant tales. Nevermind.

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
    16. Re:Adaptation... by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      I'm glad that you said that. I literally had no clue that he meant that. I assumed that tails had ripped off. I assumed that the electrified fences must have had barbs on them that somehow snagged the deer. I know. It's crazy, but it never dawned on me that he misspelled something.

      That's why I hate it when people don't bother proof reading and using dictionaries for spell checks.

    17. Re:Adaptation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Contrary to your belief, they do not have a science council or war council to work on their war against humanity.

      I suggest you moving to a tropical country. Then you will be quite sure that they do. Probably in conspiracy with all annoying light seeking insects that go out in the summer.

    18. Re:Adaptation... by symes · · Score: 1

      I like this idea a lot but would like to have the light barrier as the death trap. We need more lasers in the world. With the advantage that mosquitos might evolve to avoid all forms of light, including romantic candle light.

    19. Re:Adaptation... by ehrichweiss · · Score: 1

      Macro-evolution has already been observed in the lab and in the wild so I'm afraid you're incorrect there.

      http://www.dbskeptic.com/2008/06/21/macro-evolution-observed-in-the-laboratory/

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    20. Re:Adaptation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've clearly not been to India.

    21. Re:Adaptation... by N0Man74 · · Score: 2

      You're on Slashdot. You should realize by now that reproductive activities aren't required for survival (for the individual member of a species).

    22. Re:Adaptation... by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      Um, the 'rest of the point' was about nets, not repellents.

      I don't think evolution can do a single step big enough to give mosquitoes ability get through a net.

      --
      No sig today...
    23. Re:Adaptation... by X0563511 · · Score: 1

      but but but there was no underline! </sarcasm>

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    24. Re:Adaptation... by operagost · · Score: 1

      The ability to reproduce is even more important that the survival of an individual in some species. There are insect species that don't even seek nourishment as an adult.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    25. Re:Adaptation... by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

      As far as I can parse English, you were responding to the "Never seen repellant-resistant mosquitoes have ya?"

      Answering "I won't" to "I'll give you the rest of that point though." makes no sense to me.

    26. Re:Adaptation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hand in your man card at the exit on your way out there, thanks for coming.

    27. Re:Adaptation... by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Contrary to your belief, they do not have a science council or war council to work on their war against humanity. and evolution takes a lot more time.

      +5 for the mental image. :)

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    28. Re:Adaptation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either that or they become immune to lasers.

    29. Re:Adaptation... by weszz · · Score: 1

      Then my freakin sharks with lasers will be useless!!!! We must stop this now.

    30. Re:Adaptation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are missing the point entirely. This is the most expensive mosquito net ever devised.

    31. Re:Adaptation... by Bowling+Moses · · Score: 2

      "If people were the main source of nourishment for mosquitoes, then yes. But they're not."

      That depends on the mosquito species. Anopheles gambiae is the major carrier of the malaria pathogen and has a very strong preference for humans: if given the choice between livestock and humans, they pick humans 90% of the time. Aedes aegypti is the vector for yellow fever, dengue, and chickungunya, and also prefers humans. It appears that humans secrete comparatively elevated levels of L-lactic acid which for some species of mosquito is an attractant. For others L-lactic acid can have no effect or even be a repellant. There are many species (and over 40 genera according to some classifications!) so there are many different chemical cues that can affect mosquito host preferences and many different ecological niches for the different mosquito species to inhabit.

    32. Re:Adaptation... by TheLink · · Score: 1

      FWIW in some languages a "tail of deer" actually makes sense, e.g. Indonesian, Malay:
      http://bahasakita.com/about/grammar/the-classifiers-buah-orang-and-ekor/

      In English, it'll probably be a herd, a parcel or X head of deer.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classifier_(linguistics)
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_collective_nouns
      If head of deer is fine, why not tails of deer ;).

      Anyway I don't know linguistics and I've no idea what the difference is between classifiers and collective nouns.

      --
    33. Re:Adaptation... by shaitand · · Score: 1

      How? I know the now abandoned previous effort using lasers would be pretty pricey but this is using regular IR light if I understood the story correctly.

    34. Re:Adaptation... by eugene+ts+wong · · Score: 1

      Thanks for pointing me to the article! I still think the person had it wrong.

      The classifier is for counting the individuals, and while the collective nouns are used for referring to the group. For example, your herd of cattle might have 5 head of cattle.

    35. Re:Adaptation... by adolf · · Score: 1

      You're on Slashdot. You should realize that I am fully willing to back up my conjecture with a wild array of anecdotes and maybe even some minimal research, and will defend it to death even if that means a dissertation on the philosophical aspects of the discussion.

      But I really don't feel like it just now...

      (Thanks for your reply. You made me laugh a bit.)

    36. Re:Adaptation... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is true but unless the light barrier is physically harmful to their 'persons' it will just be a matter of time. Without physical harm or pain I have to agree that it is a matter of time before evolution takes over.

    37. Re:Adaptation... by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      jovius:

      It depends how important a resource humans are for mosquitoes. Mosquitoes have not learnt to bite through nets either or stand insect repellants.

      Narcocide:

      Never seen repellant-resistant mosquitoes have ya? Clearly you've never lived near swamp land. I'll give you the rest of that point though.

      So, the rest of the point is about the nets (assumed) which is what he was saying "I won't" to.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    38. Re:Adaptation... by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

      My parsing mistake then.

  3. IR = heat by flyingfsck · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Most insects are very heat sensitive and will die quickly when temperatures are elevated. So I suppose the mozzies see the IR light as a dangerous threat and move away.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    1. Re:IR = heat by Idbar · · Score: 1

      Which makes me think, why there are plenty more mosquitoes in warm weather places? and why they pile up near the hot incandescent bulbs?

  4. And how much to plug it in? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    These people don't have an outlet to keep away the mosquitoes with a nightlight...
    They do not even have enough clean water to drink.

    Handing out $1,000,000? I'll take some.
    And like the "death laser mosquito killer" is coming to a backyard near you soon. Yea right.

    1. Re:And how much to plug it in? by ThorGod · · Score: 1

      These people don't have an outlet to keep away the mosquitoes with a nightlight....

      They'll shoot a satellite up into orbit and beam the light down evenly across all of Africa so that nobody has to pay. ...oh, right.

      (I had the same question...)

      --
      PS: I don't reply to ACs.
    2. Re:And how much to plug it in? by Issarlk · · Score: 1

      That's why other people are busy trying to find ways to give these people electicity, like cheap solar installation with batteries for example.

    3. Re:And how much to plug it in? by muon-catalyzed · · Score: 1

      > These people don't have an outlet

      That is all part of the plan. Those 'potential African customers' have no access to electricity, no PC, so they will not be able to buy Windows anyway. Now, this might speed up the much needed electrification!

    4. Re:And how much to plug it in? by shaitand · · Score: 1

      There's nothing cheap about a solar installation with batteries. Not in initial materials and not in maintenance costs.

  5. Tennis Racket Bug Zappers instead? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 1

    Gee, $1M could sure buy a lot of these: http://www.amazon.com/Battery-Operated-Tennis-Racket-Shaped/dp/B003U55W6Y

    And Mr Gates could certainly strong arm a much better price out of the supplier, or just buy the manufacturer.

    The downside is that once in your hand, you cannot remove the racket, and are forced to buy upgrades.

    "A Tennis Racket Bug Zapper For Every Child!"

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:Tennis Racket Bug Zappers instead? by game+kid · · Score: 1

      Gee, $1M could sure buy a lot of these: http://www.amazon.com/Battery-Operated-Tennis-Racket-Shaped/dp/B003U55W6Y

      And Mr Gates could certainly strong arm a much better price out of the supplier, or just buy the manufacturer.

      Now he just needs to set up this racket racket with Racket before Slashdot posts a Hadoop dupe.

      --
      You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
    2. Re:Tennis Racket Bug Zappers instead? by Dot.Com.CEO · · Score: 1

      Say what you want of Bill Gates and his business tactics, but his foundation's work on eliminating malaria is truly amazing. Give credit where credit's due, sir, even though you may not like the guy.

      --
      Mother is the best bet and don't let Satan draw you too fast.
    3. Re:Tennis Racket Bug Zappers instead? by 0100010001010011 · · Score: 1

      Screw tennis racket bug zappers. I'm sure everyone wouldn't mind Gin and Tonics.

    4. Re:Tennis Racket Bug Zappers instead? by bitingduck · · Score: 1

      Gee, $1M could sure buy a lot of these: http://www.amazon.com/Battery-Operated-Tennis-Racket-Shaped/dp/B003U55W6Y

      Those things are awesome! I've been using one for years and keep meaning to modify it to be shaped like a lightsaber-- in a room with a few mosquitos in it it's a lot like the "luke learns the lightsaber" scene in Star Wars.

    5. Re:Tennis Racket Bug Zappers instead? by TheLink · · Score: 1

      Speaking from experience once you start using those a lot the mosquitoes actually do appear to evolve in response. Subsequent generations were smaller, flew faster, withdrew their probes faster, had quicker reflexes and way too many seemed to be able to figure out the difference between me lying in bed holding the racket, pretending to sleep while waiting to swat them; and me lying in bed actually asleep! This was in contrast to slow mosquitoes in another place which I could even prod with my finger while they were flying...

      Anyway resorting to mosquito netting everywhere (windows, doors, gaps under doors etc) worked better. For a while it did give me some satisfaction to have a fan blow air out my room via a netting while having a fly zapper at the other side of the netting. Zapped very many mosquitoes that way. Perhaps if I kept it up for years they might have evolved to not like the scent of my room or whatever it is they're flying to which would be fine by me :). The problem was two or so geckos decided to get zapped too in their pursuit of the mosquitoes. So in the end I left the "mosquito removal" to the geckos waiting at the netting.

      As for this light barrier, I don't think it would work very well, just a slight breeze and they might be blown across it. And if enough manage to ignore it, make it across and reproduce, subsequent generations would be more likely to ignore the light barrier.

      Ignoring mosquito netting is a bit harder - they have to physically become smaller - which is actually is possible. So you have to kill any mosquitoes that make it through :).

      Someone I know actually ordered octenol, bought a bug zapper and tried to build his own mosquito killer, but somehow the mosquitoes still preferred humans to his mosquito killer :).

      --
    6. Re:Tennis Racket Bug Zappers instead? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Similarly, the Carter Center extermination of the Guinea worm gives me a nonnegative respect for Jimmy Carter.

    7. Re:Tennis Racket Bug Zappers instead? by osu-neko · · Score: 1

      Say what you want of Bill Gates and his business tactics, but his foundation's work on eliminating malaria is truly amazing. Give credit where credit's due, sir, even though you may not like the guy.

      I don't like the way he made his money. I do like what he's been doing with it. As for liking the guy, I don't even know him...

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  6. Ever since the demise of Dr Evil by maroberts · · Score: 1

    The unemployment rate of sharks has been extremely high.

    Thanks to the research above, sharks with frikin' lasers attached to their heads can be first in line for this new job sector. I am sure Sharks everywhere express their gratitude to Bill and Melinda for funding the research which opens new opportunity vistas for unemployed sharks who are at risk of descending into a life of crime through underuse of their talents.

    --

    Donte Alistair Anderson Roberts - hi son!
    Karma: Chameleon

    1. Re:Ever since the demise of Dr Evil by cbope · · Score: 1

      And it opens the door for mosquitos with frikin' lasers!!! I mean come on, everyone knows sharks can't move around too well on land or in the air... but mosquitos with frikin' lasers... EVERYONE PANIC NOW!!!

  7. What happened to... by xenobyte · · Score: 1

    The genetic solution to fighting the malaria mosquitoes?

    If I remember correctly, one focused on making the mosquito deadly to malaria (thus stopping the transmission), the other on simply wiping out the mosquito without harming other insect life.

    The most efficient solution so far has been to blanket ponds and similar with DDT... Killed everything, including the mosquitoes. Tiny side-effect there though...

    --
    "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
    1. Re:What happened to... by adolf · · Score: 1

      Yeah. I guess some scientist somewhere determined that some bird eggs had thinner shells in areas treated with DDT, than some other bird eggs in other areas that were not treated with DDT.

      IIRC, no attempt was made beyond simple correlation to explain these presumably-valid observations.

      And then, -poof-, no more DDT.

      But at least we've still got mosquitoes, malaria and bed bugs.

    2. Re:What happened to... by Bowling+Moses · · Score: 1

      The genetic engineering project is still ongoing but that's a solution (or potential solution) that will take a long time to deploy. Insecticides remain the best way of controlling mosquito populations, but insecticide resistance is an ever-growing problem. That's not too surprising when you think about the vast population size, coupled with the fact that in tropical regions some species of mosquito can go through over 20 generations a year. You spray the same chemical several times a year for a couple decades and evolution of resistance is going to happen. Unfortunately there have not been any new insecticides put into the field for a long time. Oh and DDT is still used, just rarely and heavily restricted. If you've got a severe outbreak of a mosquito-borne disease, especially when you've got resistance to other insecticides, then DDT might get used. DDT is nasty, but the local health organizations have to pick the lesser of two evils.

    3. Re:What happened to... by Politburo · · Score: 1

      DDT was never banned for vector control, and is still used today. The reduction in DDT use was mainly because they adapted.

  8. how about low-tech by yanyan · · Score: 1

    Great research.

    But this seems to me like overkill. A mosquito net works and is proven and costs very very little.

    And hey, there actually already are charitable initiatives for this. http://www.nothingbutnets.net/

    1M from the Gates Foundation could probably buy enough mosquito nets to cover the whole of Africa.

    1. Re:how about low-tech by dotancohen · · Score: 1

      Great research. But this seems to me like overkill. A mosquito net works and is proven and costs very very little.

      No, you don't understand. The researcher specifically mentions that the laser divides space into two parts, and that the mosquitoes cannot move from one part of the space to the other. Do you really think that a simple net could divide space into two parts?

      --
      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
    2. Re:how about low-tech by otie · · Score: 2

      Er, Bill & Melinda Gates are "longtime partners" of Nothing But Nets: http://www.nothingbutnets.net/blogs/a-buzz-worthy-week-at-the-malaria-forum.html

    3. Re:how about low-tech by JoeMerchant · · Score: 2

      1M from the Gates Foundation could probably buy enough mosquito nets to cover the whole of Africa.

      Mosquito nets are well known and have been widely available for 50+ years. If $1M in nets would wipe out malaria in Africa, it would have happened by now.

      I think you're glossing the inefficiencies involved in distributing anything to "the whole of Africa" - the administrative costs alone in distributing something as simple as a "LiveStrong" armband to every person in Africa (or even just those who are at risk of malaria from mosquito bites) would exceed $1M.

    4. Re:how about low-tech by rocket+rancher · · Score: 1

      Great research.

      But this seems to me like overkill. A mosquito net works and is proven and costs very very little.

      And hey, there actually already are charitable initiatives for this. http://www.nothingbutnets.net/

      1M from the Gates Foundation could probably buy enough mosquito nets to cover the whole of Africa.

      Take a longer view. I'm looking forward to the day when this laser barrier is considered "low tech." Pure research is expensive, and even applied research that beats the odds and has a payoff down the road still requires significant seed funds. Purchasing mosquito nets for people who can't afford them is a worthy charitable endeavor (thank you for making me aware of it; I just donated the cost of ten nets) and allows people of any financial means to participate in helping to deal with the immediate problem. Organizations like the The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation that have significant financial means can target more permanent solutions by providing funding for targeted research.

    5. Re:how about low-tech by radtea · · Score: 1

      I think you're glossing the inefficiencies involved in distributing anything to "the whole of Africa" - the administrative costs alone in distributing something as simple as a "LiveStrong" armband to every person in Africa (or even just those who are at risk of malaria from mosquito bites) would exceed $1M.

      Which is to day, eliminating malaria is not a technical problem at all. Malaria used to be common where I live now, back in the 1800's. But improved sanitation fixed that over a century ago. An engineering student I know recently commented, "We have a design project on clean water for the developing world, but if you look at it for a few minutes you realize it isn't an engineering problem. You don't need any technology the Romans didn't have."

      What the developing world is lacking is not technology or tech-savvy people, but the rule of law.

      --
      Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
    6. Re:how about low-tech by Locutus · · Score: 1

      but a mosquito net does not require the use of Microsoft Windows as I'm sure these lasers would likely require embedded Windows at the very least. Remembering that Gates was recently shown to have terminated the Courier project because it did not lock^H^H^Hintegrate with MS Office nor MS Exchange.

      LoB

      --
      "Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
    7. Re:how about low-tech by plover · · Score: 1

      Mosquito nets have suffered from a completely unexpected side effect. Many of the recipients of these nets started using them to make minnow seines for fishing. That kind of use would tear the fabric, and they'd be useless for sleeping. Turns out that hungry people would rather eat fish than worry about mosquitoes when they sleep. Who knew?

      Which makes me wonder what people might repurpose these mosquito repelling lasers for? They might pry them apart for the batteries to run lanterns or radios. Or they might discover something really weird, perhaps something like painting the lenses with dried urine will make them into usable flashlights.

      --
      John
    8. Re:how about low-tech by 0111+1110 · · Score: 1

      Which is to day, eliminating malaria is not a technical problem at all. Malaria used to be common where I live now, back in the 1800's. But improved sanitation fixed that over a century ago.

      Not only is it a technical problem but it is a very difficult one. And what kind of 'improved sanitation' can eradicate malaria?

      --
      Quite an experience to live in fear, isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave.
  9. Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously? Many of the people at risk are in poverty and don't have electricity. And why use additional electricity, when one of the greatest problems we face today is global warming...

    Just use the millions of dollars to distribute cheap and environmentally friendly mosquito nets!

    1. Re:Waste of money by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      And why use additional electricity, when one of the greatest problems we face today is overpopulation...

      Fixed that for you. Global warming is a symptom. It's not the disease. Cut the population in 1/7th and we can pollute to our heart's content with a negligible impact on our environment. Double the population and we all have to pollute half as much as we do today just to maintain the status quo (yeah - like that's going to happen). Quadruple the population and we're fucked. Who is going to cut their electricity use or consumption to 1/4 of what it is today - just to maintain the destructive status quo?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:Waste of money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cut the population in 1/7th and we can pollute to our heart's content

      So... lets kill those we don't like. and let those who cannot survive properly die off...? Let 90% of 99% to their own device and we get those numbers down!!

    3. Re:Waste of money by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      The sensible argument is to be cautious and conscious about our breeding instead of advocating mass murder. There really is no excuse for couples to have dozens of children nowadays. However mass death will happen whether we like it or not if we just ignore this issue. Disease, famine and war for ever more limited resources is simply not going to ask our permission before killing us.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    4. Re:Waste of money by Muad'Dave · · Score: 1

      NPR had a report this morning about countries paying mothers to have kids because of declining fertility rates. It was all in the name of economics and not having your country die out. Silly Jingoism!

      --
      Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
  10. bugs suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    bugs suck
    lazes are awesome

  11. And In Other News... by hyades1 · · Score: 2

    Several Winnipeg mosquitoes demonstrated their opinion of the "Light Wall" under a large banner that read, "Prototypes welcome, Einstein. Why do you think megafauna are extinct."

    Some wore sunglasses and lounged on what appeared to be small beach towels. Others sported t-shirts reading "I gotcher emitter right here".

    The dessicated remains of a grizzly bear had been propped up nearby, its dead paws holding a crudely-lettered piece of cardboard that read, "I never shoulda said "Suck This" .

    Further developments are expected next spring with the hatching of a new generation of the worst bloodsucking parasites to be found outside Parliament.

    --
    I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  12. Will not work by stooo · · Score: 0

    Mosquitos in Africa are faar more agressie. They will just go through after a short time.

    --
    aaaaaaa
  13. Independent evaluations of mosquito repellents by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1

    The risk is imminent that these methods are as much scam as most previous methods, however well meant they may be.

    For a really nice overview and analysis of electronic mosquito repellents, please see http://eprints.liv.ac.uk/665/1/Enyati_electronic_mosquito_repellents.pdf

    Here is the summary:

    "Electronic mosquito repellents for preventing mosquito bites and malaria infection
    Malaria is a major health problem that particularly affects people living in sub-Saharan Africa and other tropical parts of the world. It
    often causes considerable morbidity and mortality especially in children under ve. It is transmitted by mosquito bites from infected
    female mosquitoes. Several strategies and approaches are available for preventing mosquito bites and malaria infection, including
    repellents, and these approaches will be considered by those living in affected areas and by travellers to areas where there is high risk
    of infection. Electronic mosquito repellents (EMRs) are designed to repel female mosquitoes by emitting high-pitched sounds almost
    inaudible to the human ear. EMRs are claimed by their manufacturers to be effective in repelling mosquitoes and preventing disease.
    No randomized controlled trials were found, but 10 eld studies looking at the number of mosquitoes caught on the bare body parts
    of humans were assessed. These studies were conducted in various parts of the world with different species of mosquitoes and were
    controlled for factors such as locality and timing. One study used just one observer with seven observations, while the highest assessment
    included 18 observers with 324 observations. There was no evidence in the eld studies to support any repelling effects of EMRs, hence
    no evidence to support their promotion or use. Future randomized controlled trials are not proposed as there was no suggestion in the
    eld studies that EMRs show any promise as a preventive measure against malaria."

    Gates uses his money for good research. Still, that article does show that Gates needs to have several independent evaluators, unknown to each other, too.

    1. Re:Independent evaluations of mosquito repellents by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      You're trying to compare a repellent method using light, with one using sound. Totally different medium (light vs sound), totally different method (chasing away vs. setting up a barrier).

      And I may assume Bill Gates is smart enough to have some people evaluate these projects for him. Note that TFA mentions that this is the second grant this project receives; and that many other projects did get first grant, but no second. That means they have been evaluating, and have concluded this one has merit.

    2. Re:Independent evaluations of mosquito repellents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "You're trying to compare a repellent method using light, with one using sound."

      No, my intention was to show that the scientific reliability differed radically between a dozen different studies using one method. From what I can tell, the experiment design is a seriously crucial factor.

      "Note that TFA mentions that this is the second grant this project receives; and that many other projects did get first grant, but no second. That means they have been evaluating, and have concluded this one has merit."

      Yes, agreed, but since there is so much money involved, I would be paranoid, and still let a second and third set of evaluators evaluate both my evaluators and what they evaluate. That is me, micromanaging... :)

      Solving the malaria issue would be so important, and it mustn't fail.

  14. Superluminal Insects by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well it's good to know that mosquitoes aren't going to become our FTL overlords any time soon.

  15. No feedback by bWareiWare.co.uk · · Score: 1

    Even if you could make these small, low power, and most importantly cheep enough, and even if the mosquitoes can't adapt. This has the fundamental problem that anything that casts a shadow in the beam is undetectable to humans, yet renders the device worthless.

    1. Re:No feedback by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not to mention the case where a mosquito gets blown into the protected region and can't get out, so it bites you 1000x while you sleep.

    2. Re:No feedback by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Go to 1:42 in the video. They pair the IR mosquito repellent with a low-powered visible laser to mark the protected area.

  16. Light Barrier Repels Mosquitoes by clickclickdrone · · Score: 2

    I read the title as there being some breed of supra-light mozzies who were being upset by the speed of light limitation. Still, if that CERN work on possible FTL particles pans out, they'll be all happy again.

    --
    I want a list of atrocities done in your name - Recoil
    1. Re:Light Barrier Repels Mosquitoes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You were not the only one. Too much science fiction warps your brain.

  17. FTL Mosquitoes? by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

    Are they repelled, or just mildly annoyed.
    Also, they should incorporate UV light as a secondary feature so your can be mosquito free while tanning.

    --
    Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
    1. Re:FTL Mosquitoes? by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      There's something deliciously cruel about lying there, 95-100% unclothed, and the mozzie can look, but not touch.

    2. Re:FTL Mosquitoes? by bryan1945 · · Score: 1

      I think that would be the insect equivalent of the "peep booth."
      I now feel unsettled I made such a bizarre connection.

      --
      Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  18. Re:[Citation Needed] - laser mosquito control dang by justforgetme · · Score: 0

    AFAIK the laser app was the same ass the light app only that it used a laser to create the barrier itself and therefore needed a higher power laser beam. That makes eye injury from beams reflected off of shiny surfaces a possibility.
    This app uses the laser only for marking the protected volume which is doable with a "safe" low power beam.

    Anyway, I'm so buying two dozen of these when they come to market!

    --
    -- no sig today
  19. OR... by justforgetme · · Score: 1

    what about the Blind mosquito?

    --
    -- no sig today
    1. Re:OR... by Pieroxy · · Score: 1

      what about the Blind mosquito?

      Busy hitting walls.

  20. star wars mosquito laser defence system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Come on. The lasers worked just as well:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TGkPMZxWPpA

  21. IR != heat by subreality · · Score: 3, Interesting

    IR is a very broad spectrum. They don't say what the wavelength is, but I'd expect they're using near-IR, which is cheap, widely-available laser technology. Do you feel warm when you cover the front of an infrared remote? Near IR isn't a strong heat carrier unless you're pushing a LOT of photons... In which case this isn't a safe alternative to the high power bug-zapping lasers used in those wonderful videos.

    Far-IR lasers are expensive, inefficient, finicky machines. They're not the sort of thing you'd deploy to fight malaria.

    In between there's a whole lot of spectrum, but really, I think it's most likely they're using near IR, the mosquitoes see it, and for whatever reason they don't want to cross.

    1. Re:IR != heat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, it's not the energy carried by the IR light here that's important, but a hot object (by nature's standards) will be emitting most strongly in the mid or near infra-red. Doing some basic calculations with Wien's law, humans at ~310K have peak emissions at ~10um light, which is Mid-IR. Meanwhile, objects at ~3000k will thus be ~1um, which I think is around what standard commercial IR sources use (such as the Nintendo Wii, somewhere around 900nm). So it seems reasonable that the insect may interpret this rise in Near-IR light as an approach to an object at a few thousand Kelvin, which it would want to avoid.

  22. now if only... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they could come up with a light barrier to keep the homeless from in front of my shop doorway; i'm tired of flushing the sidewalk every morning

    1. Re:now if only... by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      Set up a sprinkler to run at night.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  23. electric rackets work great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The one thing that works great is electric rackets : they're (german patented?) device with a size half-way between a tennis racket and a ping pong racket. They're made of parallel solide "wires" with a space between them. They get charged with electricity and everytime something gets close to two wires, the energy is discharged and the mosquito goes EOL.

    I go on vacation in a place very, very problematic regarding mosquitoes. My room as a full net deployed so I can leave the door open without having mosquitoes get in. Then I also have several of these electric rackets around the house. Instead of using a net (that's too gentle for the mosquito), I've considered building a door-sized equivalent of the racket: this not only would prevent them from getting in but would also kill every single mosquito touching the device.

    1. Re:electric rackets work great by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      I gave up on those racquets after two in a row broke with the first zap.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
  24. editors? by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    1) "proves to be a deviation from" = is different than
    2) how was the former use of lasers to down mosquitos 'dangerous'? I never saw anything about any observed or postulated danger to people unless they happen to vibrate precisely at the frequency of a female mosquito's wings?

    --
    -Styopa
  25. obligatory: Starwars Musquito Defense System by Barryke · · Score: 1

    obligatory: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSIWpFPkYrk the Starwars Musquito Defense System by groenbrothers.

    A great parody on your average American-style commercial infomercial braincast(tm).

    --
    Hivemind harvest in progress..
  26. Stop targeting airplanes bla bla bla by sgt+scrub · · Score: 1

    This is awesome. I'm tired of letters complaining about my sketer killer accidentally targeting planes. I hope some specs come out soon.

    --
    Having to work for a living is the root of all evil.
  27. Meme recognition contest of the morning: by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

    So, why don't sharks get mosquito bites?

    1. Re:Meme recognition contest of the morning: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Professional courtesy?

  28. It is more like decoys than barrier. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1
    The mosquitoes find their prey/victims/hosts through a combination of temperature and humidity trails in the air. These IR beam heat the air and create the signature of a host where there is none. Mosquitoes fly toward these beams due to heat signature, gets confused by the lack of humidity signature, gets scared and stop and go back.

    I always thought it would be a good mosquito trap to heat a small bowl of water at 98.4 degrees and surround it with fly paper or something. May be the next version would use a decoy humidity signature generator and steer the mosquitoes to the trap.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
    1. Re:It is more like decoys than barrier. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The mosquitoes find their prey/victims/hosts through a combination of temperature and humidity trails in the air. These IR beam heat the air and create the signature of a host where there is none. Mosquitoes fly toward these beams due to heat signature, gets confused by the lack of humidity signature, gets scared and stop and go back.

      LOOOOL
      I am not a scientists, but, 'gets scared and stop and go back' part made me laugh. I scare fly from my sandwitch it is scared and flies away, right...
      It forgets what happened and comes back in 5 seconds. I scare it again, it flies away and comes back...

  29. Open air by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Please put these in my home's windows so that I can leave them open without screens all summer long like I'm living in Hawaii!

  30. i used light for ages and didnt realize by kangsterizer · · Score: 1

    ive a certain type of light here that i use to repel mosquitos. ive done it for a while and it works very well. whenever i turn it on they all got away from the scope of the light.
    it seems that it needs to be a on certain light wave to work. it doenst need to be invisible to humans, but it helps sleeping i guess.
    I'm also guessing mosquitos adapt and eventually wander through the light. Some of them are at my place as ive been using it for a long time. its rare tho, but, i guess eventually more of them will adapt.

    i though it was more or less a common trick. if only i realized it was worth $1M. life sux!

  31. IR != heat (plus definition) by bityz · · Score: 1

    heat = the energy of a large number of particles & heat = how it feels when the particles are you.

  32. Power Source? by Kamiza+Ikioi · · Score: 1

    The people this solves the problem for don't even have clean running water. Where the hell are they supposed to plug this in with no electricity? Not to mention the price of the device plus generators and human/crank battery chargers.

    Talk about over-engineering the solution!

    --
    I8-D
    1. Re:Power Source? by gnu-sucks · · Score: 1

      Since the devices would likely be donated anyway (the same folks don't typically carry any sort of currency), I think it's reasonable to assume the final product will include a daytime solar cell and a battery. My guess is the device doesn't use much current so the solar cell and battery need-not be the expensive type we typically associated with these devices in home-power applications.

  33. So this is how level 1 force field is born. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fingers crossed.

  34. My hero by Mike · · Score: 1

    Anyone who invents a non-carcinogenic method of repelling mosquitoes 100% effectively will be my hero for life.

    1. Re:My hero by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Anyone who invents a non-carcinogenic method of repelling mosquitoes 100% effectively will be my hero for life.

      Set yourself on fire. Non-carcinogenic and will repel 100% of bugs.

      Might not be what you're looking for though.

    2. Re:My hero by Mike · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it would only work once.

  35. lasers? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not use fricken lasers on bats?

  36. It's not nice to fool Mother Nature by RogueWarrior65 · · Score: 1

    As crass as it sounds, the unintended consequence of this will be a massive population explosion in tropical third-world countries who will all need resources. A nice pandemic will go a long way to reducing humans' impact on the planet.

    1. Re:It's not nice to fool Mother Nature by nedlohs · · Score: 1

      I trust you lead the way by not having any vaccinations and refusing any medical treatment invented in the last 3000 years.

  37. Bring'em on! by yog · · Score: 1

    Oh, I can't wait for the day when mosquito zappers not only really work, but are inexpensive wearable accessories! I hate mosquitoes. I would love to have something in my hat, or belt buckle, or shoes, that is constantly scanning for mosquito-shaped flying objects and zapping them with miniscule lasers. Also, some kind of IR-equipped zapper hanging over the bed would be nice.

    I think we should pour billions of dollars into mosquito extermination research. Sure, it may mess up the food chain a bit, but I frankly don't care. Let those birds, frogs, and dragonflies eat something else. Plenty of other buggies out there.

    Eventually, I think we will have a sort of artificial dragonfly which will tirelessly hunt and kill mosquitoes around the house and yard. It will recharge on solar energy.

    But real dragonflies should not be disregarded either. A dragonfly will eat many times its weight in mosquitoes every day, and it preys on both the larval stage of mosquitoes and the flying stage. Dragonflies are very skillful fliers. If you see lots of dragonflies near a pond, darting and diving in the air, they are your friends and are eliminating bloodsucking parasites for you.

    A fun fact: prehistoric dragonflies grew to as large as 30 inch wingspans (based on known fossils).

    --
    it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
    1. Re:Bring'em on! by cpghost · · Score: 1

      think we should pour billions of dollars into mosquito extermination research. Sure, it may mess up the food chain a bit, but I frankly don't care.

      Eliminate mosquitoes, and soon, mother nature will create improved mosquitoes v2.0. At this point, we'll long for the good old times we were "only" haunted by our v1.0 variety.

      --
      cpghost at Cordula's Web.
    2. Re:Bring'em on! by yog · · Score: 1

      Oh, really? I don't see any dodo 2.0, T. Rex 2.0, Neanderthal 2.0, or carrier pidgeon 2.0 around. It is possible to extinct-ify a species. Just get rid of all the adults so they stop procreating, and presto! No more annoying itch!

      --
      it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
    3. Re:Bring'em on! by Tyrannosaur · · Score: 1

      Except we don't need to get rid of mosquitoes, just malaria. Does anyone know how we exterminated malaria in the United States? DDT. The scientist who invented it won the Nobel Prize of Medicine for it. But we can't use DDT in Africa because it causes 'undue strain on the environment.' You know what causes undue strain on the environment? 225 Million cases of malaria (in humans alone) every year. We already have extermination methods for mosquitoes and malaria. Environmentalists just don't care about the deaths that come from malaria and want them to continue.

  38. Intellectual Ventures' patent troll laser fence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    IV will probably never make their photonic fence. They're just waiting to sue anyone else who wants to proceed with it. Both of these systems could make our lives mosquito free. I'm so glad there's an alternative to Intellectual Ventures' system that may actually see production!

  39. Just Shoot 'em Down! Reagan's Star Wars Lives! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WTF have we developed the "Star Wars" technology for, if not to shoot down evil malaria- and dengue-ridden mosquitoes?

    I, for one, welcome the arrival of a portable automatic mosquito-blasting laser system. Even better would be one that automatically tracked and illuminated the target and, upon my command, blasted it!

  40. Mosquito Nets by Mr.+McGibby · · Score: 1

    Or you could just use mosquito nets. Very cool, but it's a solution in search of a problem.

    --
    Mad Software: Rantings on Developing So
    1. Re:Mosquito Nets by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      Because mosquito nets have clearly solved the problem, right?

      Also, nets are quite uncomfortable, as they restrict the flow of air, making sleeping in them stuffy.

  41. His Other Inventions by ohnocitizen · · Score: 1

    “Wherever I look I see new ideas and possibility for progress,” he says. “Some turn out to be impossible, some are prohibited by the economy, but some do work. These are worth thinking of.”

    I wonder what ideas he's had he felt were prohibited by the economy.

    1. Re:His Other Inventions by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

      An X-box Kinect hooked up to a rail-gun.

  42. lasers != light barrier? by Tyrannosaur · · Score: 1

    How are they producing this light? Incandescently? As far as I could tell from the article, they ARE using lasers- what else can produce high-intensity light at such a focus with that kind of efficiency? Now obviously it's different from aiming and zapping lasers at the bugs, but don't imply lasers are not being used unless they actually aren't.

  43. Hat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, can I build a hat that emits infra-red light in a sort of cone from my head down to my feet? Then I could take the mosquito repelling mobile!

  44. Light barrier by doobydoobydoo · · Score: 1

    should be a barrier for neutrinos as well!

  45. Re:[Citation Needed] - laser mosquito control dang by smi.james.th · · Score: 1

    AFAIK the danger with the lasers was the sharks that they were attached to.

    --
    One thing I know, and that is that I am ignorant...