
PNNL Smartphone Microscope - sebst
http://availabletechnologies.pnnl.gov/technology.asp?id=393
======
mpweiher
>The material cost, not including the printer, is under $1.

Smartphone for under a dollar? Cool. SCNR.

But seriously, this is a really cool combination of ubiquitous smart-phones
and 3D printing technology. I wonder what more we will see. Will I be able to
print myself a new set of contacts soon?

~~~
chillingeffect
>>The material cost, not including the printer, is under $1.

That's like equating the value of broken-beyond-repair automobile transmission
in a slag pile (~$50 worth of steel) with a brand new transmission installed
in your car (~$5000).

...or comparing the value of several grams of beach sand (~$0.01) with an
Intel i7-990x cpu ($1499).

~~~
sophacles
Not a reasonable analogy. The 3d printer is a general purpose tool, reusable
for many many purposes, therefore should not be considered in the material
cost. Much like hammers and saws. The cost of the tools, if you want to be
fussy about project cost in an accurate way, should be amortized over every
single use of the tool for the duration of your ownership of it.

For example do you go to (e.g.) lifehacks and tell them that the "make shelves
for $n" is an inaccurate price, because it doesn't include rent/mortgage to
have a wall or the cost of a the screwdriver, drills, and saws?

~~~
chillingeffect
In the context of lifehacks, the direction of the communication is the website
telling an individual "you can do this with your labor, your tools and $n in
money."

In these "microscrope-for-a-dollar" posts, the communication context is
different. It's misleading a mass audience that these devices can actually be
made for the amount. There is no implicit assumption of the individual user of
the microscope doing the labor nor using their own tools. The same holds true
in my analogies.

------
patcon
This is awesome. For DIYbio, the one downside (that there might be a clever
solution for) is that sometimes you're analysing mould spores or maybe
pathogens, and it seems that you're then being encouraged to rub the surface
of those slides all over an intimate device that likely is very close to your
face for a good portion of the day.

But hey, that's nit-picking on my part :)

------
ihnorton
Some previous discussions of similar techniques (from different groups):

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7591573](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7591573)

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8129934](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8129934)

------
ctdonath
Public domain? No immediately obvious restrictions, published on a government
website.

~~~
lelandbatey
So while PNNL (which is where I happen to work) may own and require a license
for this particular design, this technique has definitely been used before,
and could be reimplemented to avoid issues if necessary.

Note, not a lawyer or representative, just an intern. What I say may be
completely wrong.

------
sriram_sun
Now if there is a device that can detect my kid's ear infections without a
trip to the doctor, that would be something.

