3 ms·

The Tricorder moonshot was a stupid waste of time with their impossible stupid rules. A cheap conventual ultrasound in a stick would be a tricorder moment. Hoo

The Tricorder moonshot was a stupid waste of time with their impossible stupid rules. A cheap conventual ultrasound in a stick would be a tricorder moment. Hook in a mobile phone and 3D analyzing humans or pets or livestock or many inanimate things becomes software. This is cool and all, but unless you get the tech out of their hands it'll go nowhere for decades. Just like we've stagnated with conventual ultra sound. The cost needs to be smashed down. It shouldn't take a moonshot. This is old tech that's not hugely complicated. Get these down to $50 - https://www.aliexpress.com/w/wholesale-ultrasound-transducers.html https://www.aliexpress.com/w/wholesale-ultrasound-transducer...

MauranKilom 3y ago
Not completely objecting to this idea, but even in ideal scenarios with high-tech hardware and specialized setup, getting useful US image quality can be non-trivial and requires training and expertise. I can conceivably see that these are to some extent technical limitations that can be overcome for some level of mass-adoption. However, I don't see what use cases you have in mind that don't require a doctor for interpretation anyway (in which case having a professional device and the required expertise present in the facility is much simpler and cheaper than putting it in the hands of every patient). But also, particularly for pets I believe anything with a non-negligible amount of fur or similar (i.e. anything that is not just bare skin) will be fundamentally impossible to achieve good enough acoustic coupling for. Unless you also sell shaving equipment with it. Anything with bone in the way (e.g. a ribcage with gaps smaller than a human one) is also more or less out. For inanimate objects I really wonder what use cases you have in mind. Acoustic properties (and coupling) are even more of a variable there...
mschuster91 3y ago
> The cost needs to be smashed down. It shouldn't take a moonshot. This is old tech that's not hugely complicated. The tech is not the problem, the certifications are. It's incredibly expensive and onerous to bring new medical device designs to market, and for good reasons - if it were easier, you'd get even more quackery than you already have now (e.g. homeopathy, penis enhancement pills, "nutritional" supplements). The same is true for airplanes. Your run-off-the-mill Cessna? Its design dates back to the 50s. Almost all of GA still runs with fucking lead in the fuel because it took the FAA over 12 years to get it certified, and even in the US it is estimated to take until 2026 (!) until G100UL is widely available. Europe doesn't even have a timeframe. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avgas#G100UL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avgas#G100UL

MauranKilom 3y ago

Not completely objecting to this idea, but even in ideal scenarios with high-tech hardware and specialized setup, getting useful US image quality can be non-trivial and requires training and expertise. I can conceivably see that these are to some extent technical limitations that can be overcome for some level of mass-adoption. However, I don't see what use cases you have in mind that don't require a doctor for interpretation anyway (in which case having a professional device and the required expertise present in the facility is much simpler and cheaper than putting it in the hands of every patient). But also, particularly for pets I believe anything with a non-negligible amount of fur or similar (i.e. anything that is not just bare skin) will be fundamentally impossible to achieve good enough acoustic coupling for. Unless you also sell shaving equipment with it. Anything with bone in the way (e.g. a ribcage with gaps smaller than a human one) is also more or less out. For inanimate objects I really wonder what use cases you have in mind. Acoustic properties (and coupling) are even more of a variable there...

mschuster91 3y ago

> The cost needs to be smashed down. It shouldn't take a moonshot. This is old tech that's not hugely complicated. The tech is not the problem, the certifications are. It's incredibly expensive and onerous to bring new medical device designs to market, and for good reasons - if it were easier, you'd get even more quackery than you already have now (e.g. homeopathy, penis enhancement pills, "nutritional" supplements). The same is true for airplanes. Your run-off-the-mill Cessna? Its design dates back to the 50s. Almost all of GA still runs with fucking lead in the fuel because it took the FAA over 12 years to get it certified, and even in the US it is estimated to take until 2026 (!) until G100UL is widely available. Europe doesn't even have a timeframe. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avgas#G100UL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avgas#G100UL