
Augmented Reality in a Contact Lens - tysont
http://spectrum.ieee.org/biomedical/bionics/augmented-reality-in-a-contact-lens
======
vowelless
How apt that the article is written in 2009 by Babak Parviz, who founded the
Google Glass project.

<https://plus.google.com/100149980664588993669/about>

------
nsxwolf
This is a "display on your eye", not Augmented Reality. Nothing is mentioned
on solving the real problems of rendering perspective correct imagery layered
over the real world, adjusting for head movement, saccades, microsaccades,
gait, movement of vehicles, etc.

This is what Google Glass isn't even trying to do.

~~~
jrockway
Modern airliners have HUDs that display "perspective-correct imagery layered
over the real world". It's useful for landing in the fog.

~~~
thwest
Airliners have almost none of the problems the OP mentioned. The displays are
several feet away from the movement of the eye. Movement of the sensors is
slow and smooth. The target distance is near infinity in optical focus. The
overlayed target is a generally a giant flat rectangle. These are some
delicious simplifying assumptions.

------
jostmey
The application of augmented reality using contact lenses and other types of
head up displays was explored in the wonderful science fiction novel "Rainbows
End", which was written by none other than "Vernor Vinge".

~~~
sown
I remember one of the characters from the story, Robert Gu's friend, clutching
a laptop -- a hopeless relic in that era -- saying, "I want to see what is
really there, not what they want me to see."

I get the impression that would be me in that future, worried about what was
real or not, or how many false memories I'd be recalling because of something
that was shown to me. I'm probably just being paranoid, but so was this
character and if I recall correctly, it worked out for him in the end.

------
toki5
I'm looking forward to Glass, but man, I wouldn't touch smart contact lenses
with a 10-foot pole.

Maybe -- _maybe_ if they couldn't connect to the Internet. I know I'm playing
paranoid devil's advocate here, but if they have any sort of connectivity, I'm
going to be terrified (maybe irrationally so) of the prospect of someone
figuring out how to intercept them and blind me.

~~~
robertk
Uhh what if no physical configuration of the LEDs is sufficient for blinding?
This does not seem like an issue if the hardware is incapable by design.

Besides, such a product could arguably be more useful than a car, and
certainly more safe; you've driven, haven't you? I think you're being a little
naive and hasty. I could see a similar comment 20 years ago about cell phones
and "brain damage."

~~~
lifeformed
Maybe someone could still maliciously make it display self-illuminated shock
porn that stays in view even if you close your eyes.

~~~
yew
. . . so turn it off? I mean, someone could hack your computer and
(effectively) do the same thing for the couple of minutes it takes you to
figure out what's happening and flip the power switch. It's a screen. They're
_all_ screens.

The real danger is from more subtle manipulation, assuming most people come to
trust what's being displayed. That's true of any information source that can
be spoofed, though. GPS errors are bad enough already.

~~~
gknoy
His point was that turning it off is not an option: The automated porn-feed
injected into your glasses/contacts/etc could make it offensive enough to
effectively deny service.

Even if not porn, Spam WILL be targeted at these eventually. I recall a scene
in either "The Diamond Age" or perhaps a Gibson novel where the characters
were using smart chopsticks that had been hit by malware which had once spewed
ads but in that particular are of town had been spewing porn. Onto chopsticks.

(With my luck, it was Rainbow's End that had this scene -- I forget where I
saw it, but it was memorable.)

There will always be someone trying to find a way to inject ads.

~~~
shabble
> _You could get a phantascopic system planted directly on your retinas,

> just as Bud's sound system lived on his eardrums. You could even get

> telæsthetics patched into your spinal column at various key

> vertebrae. But this was said to have its drawbacks: some concerns

> about long-term nerve damage, plus it was rumored that hackers for big

> media companies had figured out a way to get through the defenses that

> were built into such systems, and run junk advertisements in your

> peripheral vision (or even spang in the fucking middle) all the

> time—even when your eyes were closed. Bud knew a guy like that who'd

> somehow gotten infected with a meme that ran advertisements for roach

> motels, in Hindi, superimposed on the bottom right-hand corner of his

> visual field, twenty-four hours a day, until the guy whacked himself._

\-- Neal Stephenson, _The Diamond Age_

------
r0s
This again? As usual, the problem is casually swept away deep in the text:

> By now you’re probably wondering how a person wearing one of our contact
> lenses would be able to focus on an image generated on the surface of the
> eye.

Yes, that is a bit of a problem. I'd say it's the main problem. Quite a bit of
hand-waving here, just like the many other contact-screen speculations.

~~~
twistedpair
Got a minor in optical engineering minor back in the day. I think it is
theoretically possible to create a waveform with those LED's that would
converge to an image at a distance. It's a similar problem to the recent deep
field cameras on the market today that look at the waveform across the
thousands of lenslets and reconstruct the image at multiple virtual focal
planes.

That said, those calculations are wicked complicated and take computational
power, so hopefully some genius PhD comes up with an algorithm to generate
those wavelet images in O(n).

~~~
XorNot
An array of lasers which was columinated at the point of emission could do it
(a well of 500nm cavities, with an LED module at the bottom could do it.

On the other hand: tensor displays are basically already there for what you
say (<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4r6lY8S4A6E>).

It's a pretty solvable problem, we're just lacking the miniaturization (and
power source) to make it practical.

------
iharris
Forget about AR contact lenses, I'd be stoked if they made a lens that is safe
and comfortable to wear and doesn't have to be thrown out every 2-4 weeks. :)

~~~
sigil
Curious to know what you've tried. I've been using B&L Soflens Torics [1] for
about 10 years now, no complaints. They're supposed to last for a few weeks
but I've found I can usually wear them with no discomfort or blurriness for 6
months at a time.

(For the record, I have terrible eyesight. Different astigmatisms in both eyes
and approaching -10 diopters.)

[1] [http://www.bausch.com/en/Our-Products/Contact-
Lenses/Contact...](http://www.bausch.com/en/Our-Products/Contact-
Lenses/Contact-Lenses-for-Astigmatism/SofLens-For-Astigmatism-contact-lenses)

~~~
iharris
I've been using Acuvue Oasys (IIRC) for a while now. I'm on the 4-week
disposables but my optometrist is getting worried about increased blood vessel
growth in my cornea. I think my eyes may just be particularly sensitive - this
is happening despite me wearing lenses for a max of 12 hours a day and not
exceeding the recommended 4 weeks of wear per lens.

~~~
sigil
I had problems with Acuvue Oasys back in the day as well, but I'm sure it
varies from person to person. Ask your eye doctor to order trial pairs from
different brands. That's how I eventually found the ones that worked for me.

------
mtgx
That's just Google Glass 10.0. Let's not get too ahead of ourselves. We don't
even have Glass-level glasses available in the mainstream market yet.

------
oskarth
One step closer to _Sight_ (a short futuristic film from last year).

<http://vimeo.com/46304267>

------
b1daly
I've had this nagging feeling that Google Glass type devices are going to gain
traction far faster than anyone expects. Personally I have no inclination
towards this type of connectivity. I'm fairly amazed by my regular eyesight,
and already have a problem processing the information it provides.

My fear is that as ubiquitious, wearable computing takes over, it will
increase the pressure to be connected all the time, as it further lay a meta
network over the physical world. Of course culture will start to develop
quickly around this new space, and those that don't want to wear such a device
will be hopelessly left out of vital activities.

As a sliver of hope on the opposite end, maybe those who choose to stick with
natural senses can improve those through mindfullness type methods. This might
provide balancing benefits.

I don't understand the impulse towards this type of interface. I don't feel
that great when I'm online, I have a feeling of being in alternate space, a
mental space, and being kind of detached from "real" reality.

How about a drug that would improve standard perception and cognition at low
cost and minimal side effects? That seems like technology that I could get
behind!

------
aaronbrethorst
[2009]

------
dlokshin
I wear contact lenses. I hate having to put contact lenses on every morning.
The idea of having perfectly good eyeballs, but putting contact lenses on
anyway seems very depressing to me.

~~~
TwiztidK
I tried wearing contact lenses for a little bit and I found them to be
horribly uncomfortable and they would fall out if I blinked too often. For
people like me who do not get along well with contacts, I really hope that
they don't become necessary anytime in the future.

~~~
robertk
You probably haven't found the right brand for you. I wear mine 14 hours a day
and barely ever notice them. Experiment, you can usually ask for free samples.

~~~
TwiztidK
The day I first tried on contacts, I tried every brand my optometrist carried,
most of which wouldn't stay in at all. I took samples of both varieties that
would fit to try wearing for a week. Both had issues staying in and both
caused serious irritation so I couldn't wear either for more than an hour.

While there might be a brand that would work for me, I have had no luck
finding it.

------
sfaruque
This reminds me of a Futurama episode:
<http://futurama.wikia.com/wiki/EyePhone>

------
grannyg00se
Fancy. All I want for now is a pair of glasses similar to sunglasses - but
with HDMI in at 1080p projecting a 30in screen at 3ft.

------
Shadow_Death
My question is how would the human eye focus on something that close to it?

------
nnnnni
Torchwood!

------
derleth
Am I the only one here who is amazingly creeped out by the very idea of
putting anything directly on their own eyeball?

~~~
alatkins
As a wearer of contact lenses I'm surprised how often people express this
sentiment :-)

It takes some getting used to (I seem to remember, but I've been wearing them
for 15 years), but it's not that bad, honest!

~~~
navs
While I have given it a try and had terrible panic attacks. Maybe if I kept at
it, I'd get used to it but crossing that barrier was too much for me.

