3 ms·

“I don’t like it”, which is what this comment can be summarized as, is a perfectly valid opinion. But it’s quite different from “the product is nowhere near re

“I don’t like it”, which is what this comment can be summarized as, is a perfectly valid opinion. But it’s quite different from “the product is nowhere near ready for consumers, the technology doesn't appear to be there, and I can't imagine them being able to release anything other than a tech demo for many years” which is pure speculation and dismisses the entire news as.. a lie, I guess?

FooHentai 4y ago
Reducing op's post to your own summary, then attacking that summary, is not making a point in good faith. Besides, it's not pure speculation, it's sitting on very solid foundations of reasoning that were outlined in the earlier post - Current cutting-edge tech for regular contact lenses has resulted in something (silicone hydro-gel) that lasts at best a month before it breaks down, but allows airflow through to the eye which is very important for long-term use and comfort. It's fair to be skeptical about overcoming this issue, which reasonably you would have to do if you're going to layer in some expensive tech and give a user a reasonable lifetime from the product.
Closi 4y ago
> “the product is nowhere near ready for consumers, the technology doesn't appear to be there, and I can't imagine them being able to release anything other than a tech demo for many years” which is pure speculation and dismisses the entire news as.. a lie, I guess? We shouldn't take what we read in a PR piece for granted. See: https://swimswam.com/artificial-gills-breath-underwater-like-james-bond/ https://swimswam.com/artificial-gills-breath-underwater-like... https://wccftech.com/skarp-laser-razor/ https://wccftech.com/skarp-laser-razor/ https://greenerideal.com/news/vehicles/0627-solar-powered-roadways/ https://greenerideal.com/news/vehicles/0627-solar-powered-ro... And even some of the bigger failures like Theranos where the product was technologically infeasible from the start. But with at least the three links I have listed - you can probably work out that they were infeasible by just applying common sense. A laser hot enough to easily burn through hair will probably burn your face, tiny artificial gills probably won't be able to keep up with human lungs, and we probably make roads out of tarmac and not glass for a reason. IMO I think you can work out this is far away from a commercial product from similar logic - their prototype looks like something I wouldn't want to stick in my eye, their current battery can't last the day, and existing contact lens manufacturers can't make a comfortable lens that lasts over a month even without stuffing it with electronics.

FooHentai 4y ago

Reducing op's post to your own summary, then attacking that summary, is not making a point in good faith. Besides, it's not pure speculation, it's sitting on very solid foundations of reasoning that were outlined in the earlier post - Current cutting-edge tech for regular contact lenses has resulted in something (silicone hydro-gel) that lasts at best a month before it breaks down, but allows airflow through to the eye which is very important for long-term use and comfort. It's fair to be skeptical about overcoming this issue, which reasonably you would have to do if you're going to layer in some expensive tech and give a user a reasonable lifetime from the product.

Closi 4y ago

> “the product is nowhere near ready for consumers, the technology doesn't appear to be there, and I can't imagine them being able to release anything other than a tech demo for many years” which is pure speculation and dismisses the entire news as.. a lie, I guess? We shouldn't take what we read in a PR piece for granted. See: https://swimswam.com/artificial-gills-breath-underwater-like-james-bond/ https://swimswam.com/artificial-gills-breath-underwater-like... https://wccftech.com/skarp-laser-razor/ https://wccftech.com/skarp-laser-razor/ https://greenerideal.com/news/vehicles/0627-solar-powered-roadways/ https://greenerideal.com/news/vehicles/0627-solar-powered-ro... And even some of the bigger failures like Theranos where the product was technologically infeasible from the start. But with at least the three links I have listed - you can probably work out that they were infeasible by just applying common sense. A laser hot enough to easily burn through hair will probably burn your face, tiny artificial gills probably won't be able to keep up with human lungs, and we probably make roads out of tarmac and not glass for a reason. IMO I think you can work out this is far away from a commercial product from similar logic - their prototype looks like something I wouldn't want to stick in my eye, their current battery can't last the day, and existing contact lens manufacturers can't make a comfortable lens that lasts over a month even without stuffing it with electronics.