[HN Gopher] A brief demonstration of my Titanium Cyborg Eye as a...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       A brief demonstration of my Titanium Cyborg Eye as a flashlight
       [video]
        
       Author : jiwidi
       Score  : 390 points
       Date   : 2022-10-24 12:23 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.tiktok.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.tiktok.com)
        
       | hyperific wrote:
       | Anyone remember Eyeborg?
       | 
       | https://petapixel.com/2016/01/25/eyeborg-the-man-who-replace...
        
       | jstimpfle wrote:
       | Immediate "flashback".
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rkr1oUH1SV8 . This is a German
       | version while Asterix is a french comic (and perhaps not widely
       | known outside Europe?).
        
         | sschueller wrote:
         | oh wow, I haven't seen this in many years. Thank you :)
        
       | mdtrooper wrote:
       | Somebody says Cataclysm Dark Days Ahead:
       | https://cddawiki.chezzo.com/cdda_wiki/index.php?title=Crania...
        
       | e-clinton wrote:
       | Put a projector in there and have it display your thoughts from a
       | Neuralink
        
       | estomagordo wrote:
        
         | chs20 wrote:
        
         | devoutsalsa wrote:
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | 1970-01-01 wrote:
       | Styropyro's "pretty cool, right" seems fitting.
        
       | sudhirj wrote:
       | Where does the heat go? That seems like a couple watts at least.
        
         | flak48 wrote:
         | > Does it get warm?
         | 
         | > Brian S (Creator): Nope not at all. LED's do not emit much
         | heat and the Titanium body of the eye offers great heat
         | shielding from any heat emitted.
         | 
         | [https://www.tiktok.com/@bsmachinist/video/713267837541158430..
         | .]
        
           | dymk wrote:
           | LEDs of a couple of watts do emit a noticeable amount of
           | heat.
           | 
           | Being titanium doesn't mean anything - here the heat has to
           | go somewhere eventually. Either out of the front of the eye
           | where it's "uninsulated" or it'll get hot enough internally
           | that the body will get warm.
        
             | xeromal wrote:
             | > Being titanium doesn't mean anything
             | 
             | This is a pretty confident answer, but I think you miss the
             | point of the titanium. It can act as a heat battery and
             | slowly let it dissipate all around vs a focused point of
             | heat.
        
               | kragen wrote:
               | Titanium has much less thermal mass than the same volume
               | of water. Water is 4.2 J/g/K and 1 g/cc, thus 4.2 J/cc/K.
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titanium is 25.060 J/mol/K,
               | 4.506 g/cc, and 47.867 g/mol, so 0.5235 J/g/K and 2.359
               | J/cc/K.
               | 
               | I think water is also a better thermal insulator if you
               | can keep it from convecting, and a better heat spreader
               | (to eliminate "a focused point of heat", which I agree is
               | a problem) if you do let it convect. But that's the
               | opposite of titanium being a good heat _shield_.
        
               | xeromal wrote:
               | Thanks for commenting. I'm a layman here so providing
               | hard numbers helps me wrap my head around the comparison.
               | I think you're saying that water is roughly double a
               | better thermal insulator? I wonder if the man could
               | devise a water layer around what generates the heat in
               | order to reduce the chance for burning his body?
               | 
               | He probably has to weigh the chance for water to mix with
               | the components vs a simple titanium hunk of metal. I
               | guess that's what materials engineers are for?
        
               | kragen wrote:
               | I'm a layman too.
               | 
               | No, I didn't provide numbers on thermal conductivity,
               | just specific heat, though it is now unfashionable to
               | call it that.
               | 
               | Yes, putting some water inside the titanium would
               | increase the thermal mass of the overall assemblage, and
               | I don't know of anything that would work better than
               | water for this. This would reduce the temperature to
               | which the eye-socket tissue is heated by intermittent but
               | high-intensity LED usage, reducing the risk of burns,
               | because it smooths it out over time. If the LED is not at
               | the top of the eye, or if the eye rotates, liquid water
               | would also help to smooth it out over space.
               | 
               | However, to minimize the temperature to which the eye-
               | socket tissue is heated, it would _also_ be beneficial to
               | interpose thermal insulation between the tissue and the
               | heat source, such as a thick layer of teflon around the
               | outside of the eyeball (or saline-solution-soaked teflon
               | foam). This will slow heat transfer from the hot eyeball
               | to the eye-socket tissue, giving blood flow more time to
               | convect away the waste heat and thus producing a lower
               | temperature in the sensitive tissue.
               | 
               | I think the more important issue here is that he's using
               | low enough power with a low enough duty cycle that it
               | isn't much of a problem.
        
               | dymk wrote:
               | Well sure it's a confident answer - that's just how
               | physics works. You generate heat in an enclosed area,
               | it's going to leak out. The hotter it gets inside, the
               | faster it's going to dissipate through the material
               | containing it.
               | 
               | The question is how hot will it get for some amount of
               | LED on-time.
        
               | xeromal wrote:
               | But it kind of misses the point. The titanium does do
               | something. It slows down the heat dissipation to an
               | unnoticeable level according to the creator.
               | 
               | The comment was confident and correct, but not accounting
               | for the whole picture. Couple that with a level of
               | snarkiness, and it's a classic internet comment that
               | makes the internet worse IMHO.
               | 
               | I'm always reminded of that comment on hackernews that
               | shits on dropbox when it was launched. It was correct and
               | of course dropbox was "trivial" to copy using a couple of
               | commands, but it misses the point.
        
             | hamburglar wrote:
             | Being titanium means it acts as a heat spreader and a
             | buffer that can absorb and dissipate the small bursts of
             | heat you might expect from brief flashlight use. Rather
             | than the LED touching one spot in your eye socket (which
             | would probably be a noticeable amount of heat even if not
             | uncomfortable), the heat is spread over the entire titanium
             | body.
        
               | spookthesunset wrote:
               | Given the size of the battery I'd assume you could only
               | pump out "max power" for a short time anyway. If that
               | titanium does act as a buffer, things might be good.
               | 
               | Honestly the heat thing was the first I thought of too.
               | It would nice if the dude goes into more detail about it
               | because I'm sure it is one of the top questions asked.
        
           | [deleted]
        
       | A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
       | I talked with my social circle just the other day how our
       | timeline is really a Cyberpunk timeline with only technology and
       | body augments seemingly lagging behind.
       | 
       | I am both excited and horrified, because that universe is pretty
       | dark. I suppose I should be thanking our lucky stars we are not
       | moving towards 40k universe.
        
         | debacle wrote:
         | It seems like the greatest thing lagging behind is society.
         | What the reddit poster did was possible 20 years ago, but
         | likely would have caused wistful maidens to faint, etc.
        
           | madamelic wrote:
           | Yep.
           | 
           | I have 2 RFID implants and I don't mention it to most people
           | because I have genuinely gotten bad reactions from even other
           | software engineers.
           | 
           | It's a pretty minor 'modification' but people get really
           | weirded out about non-medical implanted tech.
        
             | debacle wrote:
             | I am a body purist, but I understand why people are curious
             | about these things. More functional than navel piercings,
             | at least.
        
         | Semaphor wrote:
         | I've recently met an acquaintance with a bionic leg again. It
         | detects if he's walking forward or backward, climbing stairs,
         | walking, or running. It only needs to be charged once or twice
         | a week and works even on unstable, muddy ground.
         | 
         | Now granted, it's a 6 figure device, but still, I'm really
         | impressed whenever SotA body replacement parts come up.
        
           | bombolo wrote:
           | It's extra fun when they detect wrong and drop you on the
           | ground.
           | 
           | (got one)
        
             | Semaphor wrote:
             | Sounds super fun :D How often does that happen?
             | 
             | But then, the first time I met him, was at Wacken 2007. The
             | legs could do nothing but walking at a measured pace
             | (though I thought that was still pretty impressive), and
             | had to be recharged every evening.
        
         | dmd wrote:
         | I mean - 40k is set in the year 40k, roughly, right? We've got
         | a lot of time.
        
           | pnt12 wrote:
           | I don't!
        
         | Der_Einzige wrote:
         | This is correct. I tell all my friends to watch blade runner
         | and related cyberpunk if they want an idea for what the future
         | of AI is going to look like.
         | 
         | I really doubted for awhile that it would be so damn cyberpunk
         | and so damn predictable. Than I saw stable diffusion and
         | realized the "enhance" scene from blade runner was simply
         | prophetic...
        
         | youainti wrote:
         | I point out to people that we've got lots of cyborgs. Just look
         | at everyone with an artificial pancreas in the form of a
         | glucose pump.
        
       | icemelt8 wrote:
       | The repulsion hackernews crowd will face while opening TikTok.
        
         | newswasboring wrote:
         | Why? I've been on HN forever and I'm a huge TikTok fan. I will
         | never understand the outright rejection on TikTok, there are so
         | many cool projects which produce TikTok devlogs. Not just that
         | several niches which I don't see often enough on HN (like AI
         | ethics, not just copy right stuff) have entire channels on
         | TikTok.
        
           | wruza wrote:
           | Do most of the videos that you watch there have such
           | (subjectively) awful arrangement? I have no tiktok account,
           | and am no hater, but I wouldn't follow content like this
           | either. Cannot imagine myself receiving a notification,
           | watching $subj and thinking "this was a good one".
           | 
           | I mean it's a cool idea and tech spirit, but the form...
           | _raised eyebrows_
        
             | newswasboring wrote:
             | I am confused about what awful arrangement you are talking
             | about, but an example of good learning videos is excel
             | channels. They teach you nice tips and tricks and get to
             | the point fast.
        
           | boringg wrote:
           | Add more fuel to the fire --> https://www.thebureauinvestigat
           | es.com/stories/2022-10-20/beh...
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | andrew_ wrote:
           | I'd recommend the Joe Rogan clip where they read the ToS:
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtGwlQWqQWs
           | 
           | TikTok is the most public and effective social espionage
           | campaign ever devised or put into practice.
        
             | prvit wrote:
             | Imagine being this easy to fool.
             | 
             | Tiktok isn't special when it comes to collecting data.
        
           | bovermyer wrote:
           | You're focusing solely on the content.
           | 
           | My abject hatred of TikTok stems from who controls it.
        
             | hnbad wrote:
             | "Abject hatred" seems a bit much, even for TikTok.
             | 
             | When it comes to negative impact on humanity, Meta seems
             | far more hate-worthy. And it's not like this list is
             | particularly short (e.g. nearly every venture a16z is
             | involved in seems like it should get a spot).
             | 
             | Heck, even HN isn't without sin.
        
             | samsari wrote:
             | >abject hatred
             | 
             | Well, thank goodness we're all managing to retain some
             | perspective and not just descending into performative
             | melodrama.
        
             | newswasboring wrote:
             | Weird, Bytedance has not done anything, to my knowledge,
             | worse (or even better) than other big companies in consumer
             | software space. Do you also not use Instagram? What about
             | google or YouTube? They have done some pretty shady stuff.
             | Or oculus VR? PayPal/stripe? All these companies have done
             | extremely shady stuff, it's impossible to be at the top of
             | any of these markets without being shady.
        
               | UncleMeat wrote:
               | Bytedance's payout to creators is much lower than
               | YouTube's and their content-moderation has been more
               | harmful to people who are poor, queer, or not
               | traditionally attractive than competing platforms.
               | 
               | These probably aren't the top of the complaint list for
               | most social media and content distribution platforms so
               | I'm not saying these are reasons to consider Bytedance in
               | a different category than Google or Facebook but they are
               | worth knowing about.
        
               | manu_te wrote:
               | It's about China... Everyone that can (US, China, etc.)
               | tries to guzzle as much data from online users as
               | possible. That said, there are checks and balances in the
               | US, there is a certain level of accountability. China is
               | an absolute black box setting up an Orwellian social
               | credit system for its own citizens, and with no
               | accountability whatsoever about the data they might
               | collect from foreign citizens. So, even if everyone is
               | playing a similar game, ultimately there are differences.
        
               | newswasboring wrote:
               | > That said, there are checks and balances in the US,
               | there is a certain level of accountability.
               | 
               | I'm sorry but there is no accountability in US, there are
               | price tags.
        
           | WastingMyTime89 wrote:
           | Short video is a terrible medium.
           | 
           | I am already on the fence regarding long videos. They are a
           | rarely paying off time investment next to reading the
           | equivalent article.
           | 
           | Short videos are an immediate no from me. It's never worth
           | the investment. Realistically if it could be written in a
           | script fitting a TikTok video it's not going to go deeply
           | into anything.
        
             | ycombigator wrote:
             | Depends.
             | 
             | If you are trying to show a repeatable process, whether
             | that's just DIY or microbiology, a video is dramatically
             | better than an article.
        
             | newswasboring wrote:
             | I will have to completely disagree on this one. The amount
             | of excel I've learnt from my TikTok fyp is genuinely
             | unprecedented in my life. It feels like passive learning
             | because they appear between my other interests like history
             | or comedy. Specially stuff like archeology is specially
             | condusive to this format.
        
             | UncleMeat wrote:
             | Short video is a _different_ medium. Like it or not, TikTok
             | is encouraging creation of new culture via its particular
             | creation tools.
        
               | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
               | And the reality is that different people learn best
               | through different means. I can't stand video as a
               | learning medium for software-related topics, but to each
               | their own.
        
               | boringg wrote:
               | While damaging peoples ability to have an attention
               | station.
        
               | dicknuckle wrote:
               | I never had one in the first place so none of it makes a
               | difference to me.
        
           | lrvick wrote:
           | I do not care how good the content is. Anyone that posts
           | there is demanding people pay for access with behavioral data
           | on how many microseconds they view each post, what apps they
           | have installed, where they are located, what locations they
           | frequent, everything they type or view in the built-in web
           | browser, etc.
           | 
           | All this data goes to a centralized surveillance capitalism
           | organization controlled by an authoritarian foreign power.
           | 
           | https://lr.riverside.rocks/r/videos/comments/fxgi06/not_new_.
           | ..
           | 
           | If you -must- view Tiktok content, consider ProxiTok which is
           | an open source frontend that removes most tracking.
        
         | hombre_fatal wrote:
         | I doubt it. Most people here are doomscrollers like the rest of
         | genpop.
        
         | account42 wrote:
         | Nah, that computer-generated voiceover is repulsing no matter
         | where the videos are rehosted.
        
         | Semaphor wrote:
         | I just followed a link to TikTok for the first time. It's far
         | better than twitter, kinda like YouTube but cleaner.
        
           | pluc wrote:
           | It actually renders most of the information you'd expect with
           | JavaScript and Cookies disabled. Cannot say the same for
           | Facebook, Twitter, Instagram etc. Just can't play the vid,
           | but I can see the thumbnail.
        
             | js2 wrote:
             | https://mbasic.facebook.com/ works without JavaScript.
             | Unfortunately it's becoming increasingly broken as it
             | seemingly bit rots away from the main site.
        
             | dicknuckle wrote:
             | I just use Maki for Facebook.
        
             | Semaphor wrote:
             | While I don't have first-party JS and Cookies disabled, I
             | have everything third party disabled and had the same
             | experience. Now that you mention it, that is actually
             | extraordinary.
        
           | lrvick wrote:
           | It is like Twitter except only videos so you do not have to
           | read, and all your behavior data goes more directly to the
           | CCP instead of having to pass through Twitter servers first.
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Please don't post off-topic dross. This kind of stuff takes
         | over threads like kudzu and it's just what we don't want here.
         | 
         | Especially not the meta kind, please. Meta is the crack of
         | internet forums.
         | 
         | We detached this subthread from
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33316063.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | lrvick wrote:
         | Install LibRedirect extension and it will convert most user
         | hostile links like TikTok to their open source community proxy
         | alternatives.
        
         | speed_spread wrote:
        
         | aaron695 wrote:
        
         | nimbius wrote:
         | nonsense. for those who dont care to run tiktok ive written an
         | ephemeral microservice driven with an AWS lambda, rust enabled,
         | react framwork that uses an intuitive haskell based dockerless
         | rootless console interface for the API i created out of a go
         | based esolang implementation of the Turing complete driver for
         | TikTok included in the 7.7 Linux kernel I built a ruby on rails
         | time machine to travel into the future and clone using my
         | custom built git plugin for mercurial on AS400.
        
           | usgroup wrote:
           | That's reads like it took a lot of effort to write.
        
           | srfvtgb wrote:
           | As long as it doesn't have the robotic text-to-speech that
           | seems to be on every TikTok video.
        
           | cduzz wrote:
           | Wouldn't it be easier to use yottadb or some other MUMPS
           | derivative instead zapping it onto an AS400 cloud?
        
             | return_to_monke wrote:
             | Nah. That would induce significant overhead because of the
             | distributed Blockchain systems. I think using zig with
             | latent diffusion or some variation of GAN would do better.
        
           | andrew_ wrote:
           | how did you manage to mention rust without also mentioning
           | "fast" and "secure"?
        
       | garfieldnate wrote:
       | I had expected to see him moving the flashlight around the room
       | by just moving his eye and not his head; it hadn't occurred to me
       | before that glass eyes aren't connected to the muscles used to
       | move the eye around. I wonder if doing such a thing is within the
       | realm of possibility.
        
       | throwaway3415 wrote:
        
         | smegsicle wrote:
         | _that_ i 'd seen before, but a flashlight? that's new
        
       | haolez wrote:
       | Just occurred to me that half blind chess players could be the
       | ultimate over-the-board cheaters!
        
       | qikInNdOutReply wrote:
       | So, i hope this is lightweight, cause heave "glass" eyes deform
       | the skull over time, leading to eyesocket drop. One of the many
       | reasons that becoming a cyborg aint easy.
       | 
       | But if it was a lightweight memory device with wireless
       | connection to all devices of mine nearby. This would be neat
        
       | tediousdemise wrote:
       | An always-on camera would be my favorite cyborg eye use case.
       | 
       | Imagine being able to go back and relive memories from your
       | perspective. ML could be used to automatically caption and
       | bookmark significant events for searchability.
        
         | aar9 wrote:
         | The black mirror episode 'The Entire History of You' shows a
         | world where everyone has this capability. You might be
         | interested in watching it.
        
         | xnx wrote:
         | This is definitely coming, and I'm pretty sure it won't even
         | cost you an eye. The dropping miniaturization of cameras, logic
         | boards, batteries, microphones makes this inevitable. Likely
         | form factors are glasses or pendants.
        
         | jalgos_eminator wrote:
         | That's part of the world in the dystopian movie "Anon" -
         | https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5397194/
         | 
         | You can replay any moment in your life that your eyes saw or
         | your ears heard... but so can the government.
        
       | hbgl wrote:
       | *empty eye socket
        
       | throwaway413 wrote:
       | Flashlight is awesome. How about a camera...
        
       | koshergweilo wrote:
       | I actually met this guy before, he's been making these custom
       | eyes for as long as I can remember. He said it took him a while
       | to get comfortable making something water-tight enough to stick
       | it in his eye. Last I talked to him he was talking about scaling
       | up, hope the popularity leads to good places.
        
       | ghoty wrote:
       | Amusingly specific comment on that post: "A one eyed plumber
       | working in sink cabinets would like this."
        
       | wnoise wrote:
       | I was so disappointed when I learned what laser eye surgery
       | really did.
        
       | artursapek wrote:
       | imagine this guy breaking in to your house in the middle of the
       | night
        
       | munirusman wrote:
       | When life gives you lemons, make lemonade!
        
       | 09552655879 wrote:
        
       | jeroenhd wrote:
       | That's a very creative way of spicing up a boring old glass eye!
       | I imagine such "wearable" tech could also be the ultimate version
       | of those snapchat glasses.
       | 
       | Putting a battery inside your eye socket seems incredibly risky
       | to me, though. Especially one that can power a bright light like
       | this for a while...
        
         | ehnto wrote:
         | He does mention that "safety is paramount" and that the light
         | is at low power for now. I'm glad he's not just winging it.
        
           | spuz wrote:
           | Maybe not winging it but definitely eyeballing it.
        
         | mckirk wrote:
         | I wonder what power laserpointer you could fit in there without
         | going overboard with the battery... Imagine being able to light
         | matches by looking at them for a bit.
         | 
         | On the other hand, every mirror would be a great chance to lose
         | your other eye as well, so maybe disregard my ideas.
        
           | wingspar wrote:
           | Wouldn't it burn your eyelid too, from the inside?
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | If you're eyelids are closed, you can't be looking at what
             | your aiming. Your chances of hitting the target increase
             | infinitely if you keep your eyes open.
        
             | sonusario wrote:
             | Try not to blink challenge?
        
             | spookthesunset wrote:
             | It would have a blink sensor that turns it off when a blink
             | is detected or it points at your nose or something, right?
        
           | LeifCarrotson wrote:
           | A low-power laser pointer would still be very interesting and
           | perfectly safe. Star Trek/X-men/Superman/Star Wars dreams of
           | stunning enemies with a beam of light from your eyes, there's
           | no to have power levels that can light matches, pop balloons,
           | or otherwise cause destruction.
           | 
           | One cool use, IMO, would be a time of flight distance-
           | measuring laser: With only a single working eye, OP lacks
           | binocular vision for distance measuring. With the equivalent
           | to a Bushnell rangefinder, they could stare at an object,
           | blink twice, and hear a tiny voice literally in their head
           | say "37.84 meters".
        
             | spookthesunset wrote:
             | Might not even need a voice. I wonder if you could "tap
             | into" the remaining bits of the optic nerve and send a
             | signal that way. The signal would vary based on distance.
             | Maybe simulate intensity of light or something.
             | 
             | Would probably require some kind of crazy training for it
             | to work. Plus I have no clue what I'm talking about!
        
               | xeromal wrote:
               | Wow, you have me excited. That would be so neat.
        
             | dylan604 wrote:
             | It would need to be an IR laser, or the jig is up for being
             | a useful bar trick.
             | 
             | Heck, the old skool 1st/2nd ACs in the camera department
             | would kill for this. No need to "pull tape" any more.
        
             | aperrien wrote:
             | Perhaps you could add a temperature sensor as well? Heck it
             | might be neat to go full tricorder-in-eye...
        
             | melony wrote:
             | The issue with high power lasers is heat dissipation.
        
           | LanceKagar wrote:
        
           | RajT88 wrote:
           | Imagine cooking your face from the inside!
           | 
           | I have some laser pointers capable of lighting matches. They
           | get hot.
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | >On the other hand, every mirror would be a great chance to
           | lose your other eye as well, so maybe disregard my ideas.
           | 
           | With great powers comes great responsibility.
        
           | MisterTea wrote:
           | "Do not look at mirror with remaining eye"
        
           | bitwize wrote:
           | Optic blast!
        
           | ilyt wrote:
        
           | TeMPOraL wrote:
           | > _On the other hand, every mirror would be a great chance to
           | lose your other eye as well, so maybe disregard my ideas._
           | 
           | At those power levels? Probably every surface in general. A
           | beam powerful enough to light a match or burn through a
           | balloon is powerful enough for the diffuse reflection off a
           | table or wall to blind you.
        
             | anamexis wrote:
             | You could just wear laser safety glasses.
             | 
             | Wait..
        
               | spookthesunset wrote:
               | Safety contacts?
        
               | thomastjeffery wrote:
               | Safety monocle.
        
               | reflectiv wrote:
               | I think we're making a supervillain recipe here
               | guys...chill
        
               | vijayr02 wrote:
               | Username checks out on multiple levels!
        
               | 867-5309 wrote:
               | Homelander enters the chat
        
               | Izkata wrote:
               | This is why Cyclops from the X-Men wears red sunglasses
               | all the time, even when out of uniform.
        
             | LanceKagar wrote:
        
           | CabSauce wrote:
           | Or a sweet predator targeting system.
        
         | nigerianbrince wrote:
         | > Putting a battery inside your eye socket seems incredibly
         | risky to me, though
         | 
         | We already do this with pacemakers
        
           | hutzlibu wrote:
           | And it is risky, but it beats the alternative.
           | 
           | Whether it is worth it for a cool gadget, is another
           | question.
        
           | cogman10 wrote:
           | Not the same thing and we don't really do that.
           | 
           | Pacemakers are typically lithium iodide which do not have the
           | same risk of uncontrolled burning (that's the nickel
           | variety).
           | 
           | But also, the pacemaker sits outside the body with probes
           | going inside. You'd not want another surgery just to change a
           | battery.
        
             | Cthulhu_ wrote:
             | But then this one could be lithium iodide too. A
             | replacement eye can also be replaced more easily.
             | 
             | Anyway, your statement about the pacemaker sitting outside
             | the body with probes going inside is not correct; maybe it
             | once was, but that was decades ago.
        
             | spookthesunset wrote:
             | > But also, the pacemaker sits outside the body with probes
             | going inside.
             | 
             | This introduces an opening into the body that will almost
             | certainly result in infection.
             | 
             | Probably much less risky to periodically change the battery
             | than get the portal infected
        
             | mauvehaus wrote:
             | Pacemakers and implanted defibrillators are both, uh,
             | implanted inside your body. Typically they stick them in
             | the front side of your left shoulder. They run the leads
             | into a vein (or artery) and anchor them into the wall of
             | the heart.
             | 
             | They can implant basically under the fat layer or under the
             | pectoral muscle. Beneath the fat layer is easier both from
             | a surgery and recovery standpoint, but less secure.
             | 
             | The downside of that is that it's possible for the device
             | to flip over. They usually try to avoid securing the device
             | to anything because that can lead to discomfort or pain if
             | the device wants to move around, but they can if they have
             | to.
             | 
             | And yes, they do have to repeat surgery to replace the
             | device when the battery gets low. The leads AIUI are
             | usually a lifetime part (hopefully for all the right
             | reasons). For defibrillators, battery life will be
             | maximized if the device doesn't have to deliver shocks and
             | can stick to just pacing. It turns out if they implant a
             | defibrillator, you get a pacemaker for free.
        
               | alasdair_ wrote:
               | Screw batteries, just implant a nuclear generator inside
               | the body instead. Perfectly safe :)
               | 
               | https://www.reuters.com/article/health-heart-pacemaker-
               | dc-id...
        
               | spookthesunset wrote:
               | How many amp hours is the battery and what is the
               | voltage? I'd assume 3.7v if it's lithium ion...
        
               | mauvehaus wrote:
               | Search me :-) My experience is adjacent to an end-user,
               | not as a doctor or engineer.
        
             | eesmith wrote:
             | One of the exceptions, nuclear pacemakers using Pu-238 or
             | Pm-147.
             | 
             | "The History of Nuclear Powered Pacemakers" -
             | http://large.stanford.edu/courses/2015/ph241/degraw2/
             | 
             | > Despite the often longer life-expectancies, nuclear
             | pacemakers quickly became a part of the past when lithium
             | batteries were developed. Not only did the technology
             | improve, allowing for lighter, smaller, and programmable
             | pacemakers, but doctors began to realize that this
             | excessive longevity of nuclear pacemakers was excessive.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betavoltaic_device says
             | betavoltaic "devices include a 100 mW tritium-powered
             | device weighing 20 grams".
             | 
             | That's about 5x the weight of a glass eye -
             | https://www.muellersoehne.com/907.html .
             | 
             | Assuming linear scaling, an energy budget of 2mW isn't
             | going to provide much light.
        
               | robert_tweed wrote:
               | A glass eye filled with tritium would probably give
               | enough light to read with, continuously, with a half-life
               | of 10 years.
               | 
               | It might get a bit annoying when you want to go to sleep
               | though.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tritium_radioluminescence
        
               | kragen wrote:
               | Good points. But a low-duty-cycle laser pointer eyeball
               | could be more useful than a low-duty-cycle pacemaker.
               | 
               | You could use the 2mW to charge up a capacitor for 24
               | hours and then have a minute and a half of 2mW, which is
               | enough for a visible laser pointer reaching a few meters.
               | 2mW light _output_ is quite a bit brighter than that but
               | requires more like 20mW power input.
               | 
               | A 220 mF cap at 48 volts would hold 35 hours of 2mW, and
               | there are ceramic caps that big that would easily fit
               | into your eyeball.
        
               | eesmith wrote:
               | "A 220 mF cap at 48 volts"
               | 
               | How much does that weigh? How big is it? What's the
               | leakage current?
               | 
               | If it takes enough space away from the betavoltaic
               | device, and thus reduces the power generation, then the
               | cap will never fully charge.
               | 
               | Not knowing what you're thinking of, I picked
               | https://www.mouser.com/datasheet/2/427/134d-1763800.pdf
               | mostly arbitrarily. Note that I'm a programmer, not a
               | hardware person.
               | 
               | The lightest weights 2.6 g, which is 1/2 the weight of
               | the eyeball, so cuts the power generation to 1mW.
               | 
               | I _think_ it 's telling me there's a 10mA leakage
               | current, which I think means the cap will power up to
               | 0.1V before the leakage rate matches the power rate.
               | 
               | Now that you know my level of ignorance, what's your
               | take?
        
               | kragen wrote:
               | Yeah, that's a wet tantalum cap, those have higher
               | leakage currents. An X7R MLCC like
               | https://www.digikey.com/en/products/detail/united-chemi-
               | con/... will probably have lower leakage, though the
               | datasheet doesn't specify. Digi-Key says it costs US$45,
               | it's 20 mm x 28.5 mm x 10 mm which is 5.7 cc, and
               | probably close to 15 grams.
               | 
               | Leakage current usually increases superlinearly with
               | voltage, though. If the tantalum's DC leakage is 10 mA at
               | 50 volts, it's probably closer to 0.1 mA at 5 volts.
               | 
               | In capacitors with a given dielectric, the maximum energy
               | is proportional to the volume of the dielectric, so
               | although a 47 mF cap charged to 108 volts stores the same
               | energy as a 220 mF cap charged to 50 volts, it also needs
               | the same volume.
               | 
               | (I'm not an EE either; I only play one on HN.)
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_eye says an adult
               | human eyeball is about 23.7 mm x 24.2 mm x 23.4 mm, and a
               | spheroid like that is _p_ /6 of the corresponding cuboid,
               | so you only have about 7.03 cc to work with.
               | 
               | So probably you'd have to settle for under 1 cc of
               | capacitor, which (in the case of X7R anyway) means
               | storing more like 15 seconds of 2 mW.
        
             | AlmostAnyone wrote:
             | But that's not true... A pacemaker goes inside your body.
             | It's replaced during a surgery every 15-20 years and has
             | enough battery lifetime to last that long.
             | 
             | There used to be nuclear-powered pacemakers that could last
             | many lifetimes but nowadays the doctors say it's better to
             | replace the whole thing every once in a while, so the
             | nuclear option is overkill.
        
           | worldsayshi wrote:
           | Not sure why putting a battery in your pocket at all time or
           | one strapped to your wrist is that much safer.
        
             | shepherdjerred wrote:
             | One is inside your body, the others are outside.
             | 
             | Would you rather have a battery in your eye socket catch
             | fire and explode, or one in your pants pocket/on your
             | wrist?
        
         | GistNoesis wrote:
         | Maybe you don't need a battery and can go with wireless power
         | transmission.
         | 
         | A scaled-up version of this :
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UQ3K0suY1Dc
         | 
         | To provide more power to the led you probably need a bigger
         | coil inside the eye, it should work if you hide the induction
         | transmission loop inside a hat.
        
           | perth wrote:
           | Imagine getting an MRI with your induction powered eye and
           | the LED just explodes from the massive amount of conducted
           | power
        
         | spookthesunset wrote:
         | Honestly while a lithium battery might worry me I'd be more
         | worried about heat dissapation. Of course the dude says it
         | isn't an issue, but still.
         | 
         | I guess it might not matter much because the battery is so
         | small that you'd be lucky to get more than a handful of minutes
         | running that LED at max power.
         | 
         | This is all speculation based on a 30 second video though.
        
           | Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
           | > Honestly while a lithium battery might worry me I'd be more
           | worried about heat dissapation.
           | 
           | I mean...isn't it effectively water cooled?
        
             | spookthesunset wrote:
             | You got plenty of water mass up in your cranium too!
             | 
             | All I know is my headlamp gets mighty hot when it is
             | running at peak intensity. Like hard to touch levels of
             | hotness.
        
           | cwkoss wrote:
           | Meat sink
        
       | reality_inspctr wrote:
       | what about shielding? cancer?
        
         | SV_BubbleTime wrote:
         | Are you concerned with light or heat caused cancer?
        
       | tevon wrote:
       | Does anyone know if the eye moves in congress with the other eye
       | or if its stationary i.e. always faces forward?
        
       | thih9 wrote:
       | Original source:
       | https://www.tiktok.com/@bsmachinist/video/715758729345106257... .
       | 
       | As mentioned in the video, there are other designs, e.g.:
       | https://www.tiktok.com/@bsmachinist/video/710602314370956011...
       | (terminator). Profile page with more videos:
       | https://www.tiktok.com/@bsmachinist .
        
         | dang wrote:
         | Ok, we've changed to that from https://www.reddit.com/r/nextfuc
         | kinglevel/comments/ybisa1/th.... Thanks!
        
           | geuis wrote:
           | The Reddit link provides a better viewing experience and
           | better discussion.
        
             | dang wrote:
             | The Reddit link is still present for those who prefer it.
             | 
             | As bragr points out, the HN guidelines ask for the main
             | link to be to the original source. Alternate links are
             | welcome in the comments.
        
             | bragr wrote:
             | Neither of which conform to the guidelines.
             | 
             | >Please submit the original source. If a post reports on
             | something found on another site, submit the latter.
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
           | lrvick wrote:
           | Why would you knowingly link directly to a source even more
           | hostile to users?
        
             | dang wrote:
             | " _Please submit the original source. If a post reports on
             | something found on another site, submit the latter._ "
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
        
             | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
             | Presumably because it's the original source. On desktop,
             | both are similarly bearable, on mobile, TikTok is a bit
             | more hostile this time, but I've seen reddit put up hard
             | app-walls before.
             | 
             | (Both assumes you have an adblocker of course)
        
       | Gordonjcp wrote:
       | Needs a little "Zeiss Ikon" logo around the pupil.
        
       | sphars wrote:
       | For those that don't want to go to TikTok's page (for one reason
       | or another) there is a proxy service you can use, like how Nitter
       | is used for Twitter, called ProxiTok. Gets just the video,
       | description and ability to download it.
       | 
       | The first video in the GP proxied:
       | https://proxitok.pabloferreiro.es/@bsmachinist/video/7157587...
       | 
       | Proxy info: https://github.com/pablouser1/ProxiTok
       | 
       | (Not the creator of it but a user of it)
        
         | f0e4c2f7 wrote:
         | Never heard of this - thanks for sharing.
         | 
         | Nitter and Teddit have become near full replacements for
         | twitter and reddit for me. I don't know if they can last but I
         | love services like this without dark patterns.
        
       | INGSOCIALITE wrote:
       | with the amount of heat my tiny little pocket flashlight
       | generates, this terrifies me
        
       | herpderperator wrote:
       | How does it charge?
        
         | tgsovlerkhgsel wrote:
         | Presumably by removing it (fake eyes just pop out).
        
           | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-10-24 23:02 UTC)