Augmented Reality in 3D
 

Hey this is one the super technophiliacs here will ove, right?:
BBC News - Bionic contact lens 'to project emails before eyes'
Contact lenses that can project images into each eye. Ok, they are in animal trials only and only with a few pixels, but hey - soon you can have Terminator-vision - or get advertisements that fit to the place you are standing in.

I wouldn't mind high tech terminator-vision, but I'd only have it for one eye. So then, I can easily close that when I wish, and see nature as it is.

Heard about this on the radio today. I've always thought glasses like this would be interesting. But contacts? :stare: I presently like to forget that I'm wearing tiny bowls of moisturized plastic on my eyeballs.

Interesting thought about the advertisements, though. :P I could totally see that happening.

Animal trials..:( :( Sorry I just become saddened when I hear about experimentation on animals.

Hmm you know, this reminds me a lot of that episode in Futurama where Apple has a new product: The Eyephone that can do a similar thing. It's interesting to think where technology will take us. In the episode as well the ads pop in from nowhere in the middle of a conversation. ;)

http://cdn.cbsi.com.au/story_media/3...eyephone_1.jpg

I'd certainly rather have these as glasses :S I'm already too nervous even to wear yellow contacts for my avatar costume :P

Pali'makto, you just got 3 cool points for the futurama picture :)

This is interesting though, I could see it being very helpful for monitoring one's health stats, such as for diabetics

Now that, if anything, is truly a proper way of getting a really good immersion. Down with the crappy 3-D and their glasses and give me a pair of these.

I completely agree, what are they even thinking? Asking the animals about what they are seeing? Then again it only says animal trials, though that might just be playing with semantics, but we don't really know how they treated the animals in specific. Lets just hope it wasn't anything too unpleasant.

Yeah, I read this. Very interesting, I want some :D

It's a contact lens. You can remove it :P


They really aren't that bad. They take some getting used to, I'd advise against wearing them for the first time when doing a costume, but they aren't as bad as people say. I always forget I have mine in.

...But I don't wanna. :P

contacts are kinda funny, if they are working right, you don't notice they're there, but once something goes wrong, they're all you notice.

Not that something goes wrong a lot, it's just depends on where you are

You know, you might be on to something there. :) I think people would really like to be able to see 3D images and video without the use of bulky glasses, plus it would help with all the immersion.

I know what you mean. The fact that the animals can't register their consent and could be still experimented on really concerns me. I have all these horrible images of scientists sticking things into their eyes while they monitor their core levels and see if they make any change. If it does concern the eye then I think it might be unpleasant. Even humans have trouble adjusting to things like contact lenses as they experience pain and discomfort, even possible disorientation.

I must conclude by saying. I like the idea of this technology. It really would break through the current barrier of glasses and handheld technology but I just wish there were other ways of testing this technology.

There are numerous other ways, they are just not as practical from the financial standpoint. Animals are cheap test subjects that can't fight back, so they are ideal for the greedy profit oriented paradigm that runs our little society.

I think I will have to go throw up now after what I just said... Not only because I said it out loud, but because it is also true.

The alternative is testing on humans - and how do you do that? Paid volunteers? prison labour? Doing so would need the repeal of HUGE quantities of laws governing clinical trials, and there's ten the issue of compensation if something proves to injure someone or have debilitating side-effects when tested. In the future, it will be possible to test on cloned tissue, which avoids most issues of consent, but it's likely some people will have a problem with that too just for the sake of being reactionary.

Hmm - I have a suggestion - why not let those people test it who want to see this developed :P I mean that would only be fair, yes? To have (unpaid) volunteers doing the testing that are doing this simply because they are eager to bring this technology to the world... But yeah - animals are cheaper of course and if it goes wrong they just can be killed and thats it. Or as HNM said - what else is cheap is humans who do have little choice. Of course, all nonbiological methods of excluding damage would then automatically be implemented before trials - even the more expensive ones that are not used yet (because animals are just cheaper)