
Printing wirelessly rechargeable solid-state supercapacitors for contact lenses - bookofjoe
https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/5/12/eaay0764
======
eximius
On the one hand, cool! AR is something I'm really looking forward to!

On the other, 'oh, yea my contacts exploded' isn't how I want to explain my
blindness.

------
songshuu
Neato, but omg I do NOT want ANY form of capacitance near my cornea.

------
idclip
Well, worrisome ... but probably very significant for when the tech matures
into “non-lethal“ [sic] forms in 50-100 years.

Definitely interesting.

------
klyrs
Forget laser eye surgery, I want eye laser implants. Or, I guess, contacts.

------
ryanmercer
I legitimately can not see a valid use for 'smart contacts', unless there is
some sort of semi-valid medical application (some sort of sensor/monitor).
Also, if these are getting data wireless... not sure how I feel about a
transmitter right on my eyeball, high power broadcasts can cause cataracts
fast, presumably low ones over extended periods would too.

"But soliders could use them for"

Soldiers wouldn't wear contacts, contacts are a pain in duty/hot/cold areas
and you aren't going to want mission-critical equipment to fold up/get
something on it/fall out. Same goes for police, fire fighters, those working
in manufacturing facilities etc.

~~~
azinman2
I think the idea is to do better than glasses for AR (less obtrusive), which
is what the market currently is selling. Of course there are plenty of cons —
you’ll have to wear something to get data to it somehow, losing one is an
expensive proposition, and people who don’t wear glasses already likely won’t
go for contacts.

“not sure how I feel about a transmitter right on my eyeball, high power
broadcasts can cause cataracts fast, presumably low ones over extended periods
would too.”

Where is this data? And what assumptions are you making?

~~~
ryanmercer
>Where is this data? And what assumptions are you making?

RF causes things like cataracts, this is well established medical fact.

>When RF waves are focused on the eye, it can cause cataracts to form.

[https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-
exposu...](https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/radiation-
exposure/radiofrequency-radiation.html)

Also:

[https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/bem.10117](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002/bem.10117)

[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3526913/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3526913/)

[http://medcraveonline.com/MOJS/MOJS-02-00007.pdf](http://medcraveonline.com/MOJS/MOJS-02-00007.pdf)

[https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/200600...](https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20060051793.pdf)

Etc.

Even 30 minutes of high exposure can cause a cataract to form, so placing a
radio source directly on your eyeball, that is transmitting day in and day out
for as many as 16 hours a day, is likely going to cause some sort of issue.

And God forbid one of these capacitors fails and discharges instantaneously.

