Slashdot Mirror
Samsung Receives Patent For Smart Contact Lenses (softpedia.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Samsung has received a patent in South Korea for interactive contact lenses. The lenses will be formed of a transmitter, a camera, a display unit, and movement sensors. The lenses will be controlled by blinking. The contact lenses will be able to receive [videos or images] from a nearby smartphone, which will double as a processing unit for interactive controls and a storage device for pictures taken with the lens' camera. While Google and Swiss healthcare startup Sensimed have been working on contact lenses to cure medical diseases, Samsung's lenses are for experimenting with new methods of delivering augmented reality interfaces and data.
224 to 176
Imagine an ad showing up in your eye while driving, nothing could go wrong here.
Geordi VISOR's so prior art
They saw Futurama's eyePhone episode and decided to get the drop on Apple. Little do they know, Mom's Friendly Robot Company will acquire them both in the near future.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
After weeks of getting "You are not allowed to use this resource." while trying to post or submit to slashdot, finally a fix....
or California Voodoo Game https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Contact lenses for virtual/augmented reality exactly mentioned.
I'm getting a headache just thinking about it!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHECpEhJdB8
December, 2011
Umm where's the battery go?
Smart contact lenses ... controlled by blinking.
Now we need to punch anyone who blinks a lot? Stupid glassholes.
Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
If they can't see what's to be killed, then it will be a lot easier to have it advance.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Samsung's project has nothing to do with health-related applications
What we really need is contact lenses or glasses that actively focus with the eye to restore range of focus for older people. Range of focus is an accurate indicator of how old you are, i.e., old people might be able to see up close or see the distance, but they can't do both. Glasses that could detect how the eye is focussing (probably with infra-red sensors) and then adapt to help would be a major advance.
Take something people buy only once every few years and put it on a disposable contact lens so that they have to re-buy every few weeks. Brilliant!
That looks like another one of those patents like "wouldn't it be nice if we had...". The hard work is actually getting the display technology, camera, power, and computing sufficiently miniaturized.
From the control room, "Hey Steve, check out the third guy in line with the blue t-shirt. He's blinking a heck of a lot. Must be nervous about something. Make sure you select him for advanced screening."
will it automatically unfriend you on my Facepoop account?
This would be so useful if they could make it work, though I have no idea how they would power it.
Immediately off the top of my head, navigation would be a huge selling point, a HUD compass would be really useful, especially when travelling in foreign countries. Then there is an instant clipboard. If I could look at something, blink and then had it as a screenshot in the top left it would be brilliant. How many times have you scrawled something on a scrap of paper or had to cycle through to that buried notepad instance or webpage?
Then there would be the ability to see places you cant. Slide a thin camera into a space and you can see the bolt you are trying to get your fingers on to.
Sure all of this can be done already with various devices. But the ease of the integration would make it fantastic. That was why google glass sucked. Sure people in the US freaked about the privacy aspect but the reason no one used them was they were horrible to use and almost useless.
if the display were to face outward from the eye, could you display an image to someone the wearer is facing?
Could you imitate an iris or even a retina? Subliminally influence someone you're talking to?
That's the only application that interests me.
Sue for rounded lenses?
Prior art. Nuff said!
Pointing to his eyes. There is something new going down....
When cameras that can be disguised as facial moles become mainstream, privacy will be very dead.
Imagine a Beowulf cluster of boogers.
Table-ized A.I.
This has gotta be bullshit, or at least a conceptual patent (which is another word for bullshit), right?
From everything I know about optics -- and I teach college physics, so I'm not clueless -- if you put a video screen on the surface of the eyeball all you'll see is a colored blur over your whole field of vision. What matters is not the location of the light source on your cornea, but the *direction* it's coming from: any workable video screen would need to work kinda like a phased-array radar, but a million times smaller. Or something like the Lytro light field camera in reverse.
But while I can think of ways in which such a thing *could* work, with current technology this is utterly impossible. Anybody better-informed than me care to weigh in?
Patents should not be issued for inventions without working models. With the principle of first to file, anybody can file a patent for anything. This stifles innovation. Why would anyone work on a genuine effort for an innovation when a troll has decided to squat on an idea they have no intention of developing.
Greed is the root of all evil.
Of course, William Gibson had "interactive contact lenses" in his seminal 1980's cyberpunk novel.
Maybe he should have taken the extra step of broad-brushing an implementation in a patent application, Seems this 30-years-later "innovation" is expected to be quite profitable.
Now you can use your contacts to change what your spouse looks like to you...your marriage is 1000% times better. Now I just need hearing aids to change the sarcastic tone into something more seductive.
Unless the story describes the specific *implementation* of the device (not just the output and use aspects), it can't be considered 'prior art' for anything.
It did not end well.
I assume that they have a working prototype somewhere? If not this is yet another sign that patents have gone insane. If they don't have at least a few base examples of this "technology" then the patent shouldn't have been granted. Granting a patent on an idea alone is like someone patenting a warp drive without any idea of how to build one, in the hopes that someday, after someone else has done all of the hard R&D, they can threaten those people with a lawsuit for infringing on "their idea".
I was thinking Molly Millions from Neuromancer:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?