What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Smart Guys Keep Their Faces Looking Young view!
howlifeworks.com - Why men have finally started to use certain anti-aging skin care products...
49 Comments
- ek3s, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11984 never really tells the reader if it is even 1984...
- StacyWebb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Has anyone consider the possibility of Apple incorporating this into not a monitor screen but rather a cell phone screen...hmm the possibilities..
- gfixler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This reminds me of an old idea of mine where I wished every pixel could not only emit colored light, but also sense it. I knew you wouldn't be able to use it as a camera without a lens, as it would be like scanning something not right on the scanner glass, but I wanted to use it *as* a scanner.
Especially now with the growing ubiquity of flat panel monitors, upon which paper things can lay quite flat, I could see a dual-purpose micro LED being able to handle this concept. The idea would be you'd open a utility, or use an embedded area of a program (even via plug-in), hold a paper, photo, your boobs up to the screen, click the mouse, and it would rapidly capture the image, like using silly putty to lift newspaper print. It would [optionally] flip the image horizontally for you. The sensor bit of the LEDs (or whatever) would need to be shielded from the emitting part, as you'd need to use the lit (white) pixels to illuminate the surface. I don't imagine it being high end like a real scanner (for one thing, much darker illumination than a scanner bulb), but it would be nice, say, while in an IM window talking to someone who doesn't get what you're talking about to just slap a document against the screen and hit a "send scan area" - fax machine of the future.
Alternately, you could go with the fly-eye technique of putting a biased micro glass half bead over every pixel so they all did focus appropriately to a particular point (it would have to pick a particular point), but you'd have to be right in the sweet spot for a non blurry pic, and manufacturing optics of that caliber would be quite tricky, and undoubtedly expensive.
As a final note, the LightTalk is built as a line of alternating LEDs and (my guess) phototransistors. When you wave the image in the air, every other little SMD component isn't being used, and when you scan, the LEDs are used as illumination, so there's at least some merit to the functionality of the above idea. - krewemaynard, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0http://static.flickr.com/34/88995258_75239204b8_o.jpg
666 diggs...THIS TECHNOLOGY IS EVIL!!!
dugg. - furphy, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I think Apple intends to incorp the lens into the sensors- i looked at the patn app:
In yet another embodiment, the lens might have a variable focal length in order to zoom and focus the image. The lens might either be physically moved or have its properties altered. In the latter case, the lens might be made of a material that changes its refractive index in response to electrical stimulus or a magnetic field.
i find cameras on top of the screen really don't allow proper eye contact- i hope they actually can make this- it'd be great to look directly into someone's eyes and see their reaction - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1With the sensors spread out over a screen, and (presumably) each sensor standing for just one (or at most, a handful) of pixels, wouldn't there need to be a focusing element in front of the screen? It would be like a retina without a lens. Unless the lens is in front of each sensor--but that would be rather impractical except for a fixed-focus configuration, no?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I, for one, welcome our new telescreen overlords
- xnet, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0HMMMM spying!
- gamerzworld, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I, for one, welcome our new telescreen overlords
steamynachos
lol good remake of Vice City! VCPR!!! - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"You can't unplug it if it's installed in an iMac and the screen and the computer are one."
Then remove the driver. Somethings gotta interpret the raw CMOS data into image data, it's easy enough to simply remove it. And most likely, it'll use USB/Firewire instead of its own internal bus, so you could always disable the USB port that its using (which is also extremely easy to do).
Privacy nuts.. sheesh - MajikPiG, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1You can't unplug it if it's installed in an iMac and the screen and the computer are one.
- Berkana, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The best way to superimpose video input and output is to use a half-silvered mirror at a 45 degree angle to reflect your monitor, and have a camera pointed at you head on behind the mirror. (Your monitor's output would have to be mirror imaged though.)
This solves the problem of the "retina without a lens" that you'd have if the sensors were interspersed with the pixels, but at the expense of not being as compact as a flat screen. - dbr_onix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"you can do this already!
http://www.monitorcamera.com/"
Heheh, this reminded me of that exact site, but I couldn't remeber it.. Heheh
Anyway.. I don't see this happening, atleast in the forseeable future.. Besides, webcams are a far better idea, using your screen as a camera is pointless, and would make for insanely priced monitors, and the prices are already bad enough (On an average system, a half-decent monitor is one of the most expensive things..)
It's impraticle/useless.. With a webcam you can move it around etc, you wouldn't want to do that with a screen (Espically one as expensive as these would be..)
It's expensive
The two don't add up to a plausable product..
Unless theres a big use I'm missing, I dont see it happening..
- Ben - mgorbsky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I wonder if Apple has a "Fake Product" department where all they do is come up with some stuff where someone once said "hey, wouldn't it be cool if..." and then they patent it.
The patent gets picked up by trawlers of the USPTO and discussions like this start on various news/blog sites.
Apple suddenly not only has a patent, but consumer reactions before any engineer is even consulted. They pick the products people seem to like the most and BAM! instant apple 'genious'
Must save a lot of money on market research.
When they get mixed feedback, they must just half-ass it (a-la Rokr).
/daydream - l3ill, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0to the first post i read the patent, but i didnt understand it, but there is a focusing aspect to the camera or so it says on the patent
- RobSaint, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1hmmm.. sounds very Star Trekish. The screens onboard the federation ships are like that. ;o)
- marillion, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1It's easy to disable. It's called Duct Tape.
- Xophmeister, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I had a thought not so long ago about the issue of webcams never being at eye level; so when you're video-conferencing, etc., you're not looking directly at your subject (hence no eye contact).
Whilst this would solve that, it's rather overkill. It's *REALLY* overkill! I would imagine that it would be really rather expensive to produce as well... My thought was this - rather than one camera sitting on top of your display; how about two diametrically opposite (i.e. one above, one below; or one on either side)? Then use software to calculate the inbetween image of you (this is quite possible) - so you can look directly at the screen, but not at either camera, and the video sent will show you looking straight ahead - rather than the impersonal no eye-contact thing.
This stereoptic idea could be expanded to interpolate three dimensions, track motion, etc., etc... Given enough training, I bet it could be used to just recognise the motion from the background and hence cut out anything that's static - this could really cut down on bandwidth if it were incorporated into a codec. - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1When was it pointed out that imaging elements can be stored in the space between pixel elements in a grid-layout? That's a pretty patentable thing, just as is having two pixels for the price of one, and laying them in a slightly angled fashion for 3D LCDs.
While this is a great asset patent, Apple definitely would not be the company to implement it, for all the afforementioned reasons. However, Samsung, a HUGE corporate partner of Apple, would jump on this patent like a cat on catnip. Thus, Apple has instant licensing agreement fodder, in trade for even cheaper flash ram.
It's also a pretty damned useful patent, I hope some prototypes of this device get built. - Swift2, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1It's a privacy threat if the NSA -- or anybody else -- opens up the camera function from a remote location. Then Laura Bush would be able to look at your nee-nees.
- Bostonsox, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I wouldn't call it irony. So what, they lied to you and made you think they werent a giant corporation out to make a buck. I'd say if the ACLU invented it, that would be irony.
- andellmoon, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Xophmeister, both your ideas and Apple's are clever yet tricky. Good luck to anyone who make a practical solution that can hit the market first. :-)
- furphy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0it's ironic because in 1984 when apple introduced the mac- they had a superbowl ad comparing IBM to the fascist government 'big brother' from the book '1984' by George Orwell and in the ad a women wearing an apple mac shirt throws a sledgehammer and breaks the big telescreen- now 22 years after 1984, Apple is trying to patent an invention very like the 'telescreen' from '1984' and is, some would argue, becoming more big brother like (DRM etc)- oh, too confusing!
- sreljic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Makes you think who's the real Big Brother - Steve Jobs?!
Who's watching the watchers?
Maybe this is already implemented in current macs?!
OH no! - CaptSnuffy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0you can do this already!
http://www.monitorcamera.com/ - tmcleroy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0cool
- DrDigg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0that's scary
- CorpT, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0How is this ironic?
- heffer2k02, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0So if the display was showing what it was capturing, it would be like a mirror? That would be cool. You could almost touch people over the internet...
- phpkerouac, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0The Imac G5 is this already. The camera is mounted in the top bezel. It would be a great exhibit / experiment to wallmount about 16 of these in a dingy office, and have them linked to 16 users homes - also wall mounted - for surveillance, daily propoganda, and straming music / video of the party's choice.
- Zac3010, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Personally I am excited about this new and upcoming technology, and I am glad it is in Apple's hands. I can't wait to see what future iMacs will look like, assuming they decide to implement this technology.
- skinfitz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0...but can you turn them off?
- bramkok, on 07/02/2009, -1/+0"Steve Jobs is pissed Apple never became what Micro$oft is. Looks like he is working for our big retarded brother now. Anything to make a buck & ***** the common man..."
That's some interesting and extremely relevant info bro! - test5477, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Good job Apple.
And yea explain y this is 22 years late? If that was the case then someone would have patented it 22 years ago. Anyways sounds very interesting and good job by those Apple engineers, they seems to be getting better all the time. - freemdoom, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0would someone explain how this is "22 years too late" and "the irony?"
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"would someone explain how this is "22 years too late" and "the irony?""
It is 22 years late because they had these type of screens in the book "1984"....This is ironic because Apple's original big ad was NOT like 1984 with the woman breaking the big screen where they watched propaganda videos about Emmanuel Goldstein.. - Xophmeister, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0prionic6: dammit - well, back to the drawing board ;)
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0""Geez, I wonder why, I didn't wonder why this had been invented"."
Ya know, it'd be pretty darned simple to turn off the ability. It'd require having a USB/Firewire/Something connection to send the incoming image out, and an incoming connection. You /could/ build them into a single proprietary connector, but Apple has learned over the years that it is stupid to do connectors proprietary, because there are so many other connectors out in the world. This was part of what fueled the rapid adoption of USB in the first place, and why Apple fought so hard to standarize Firewire.
Anywho, it boils down to "if you don't like it, don't use it". Unplug it, disable it in software, what have you. You can do the same with the iSights now, but personally I'd love having that thing up there, ready to go. - Zorn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0@ vegasbright. I read 'rage cage' rather than 'rat cage'. I'd like to see a rage cage from Apple!
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0"1984 was suppose to be the futuristic year for apple"
Dude, (insert derogatory comment), you know there are these things called "books" and maybe until the Sony reader comes out there is not much of a substitute, but still you should try picking one up sometime.
Furphy, finally another 'normal' digg user awesome! - Menoats, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Old but funny. The reason its 22 years too late is because 1984 was suppose to be the futuristic year for apple. So its been 22 years since 1984 its also kind of ironic cause the dates are some what close. Blah.
- vegasbright, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Great, next they'll be patenting a rat cage that fits conveniently over ones genitals
- prionic6, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0Xophmeister, Microsoft Research is already working on this and probably has a patent. Was in the press some time ago: http://research.microsoft.com/vision/cambridge/i2i/
- stansky, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0This is weird. Im doing a project on 1984 for english.
- dknighton, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0"With the sensors spread out over a screen, and (presumably) each sensor standing for just one (or at most, a handful) of pixels, wouldn't there need to be a focusing element in front of the screen? It would be like a retina without a lens. Unless the lens is in front of each sensor--but that would be rather impractical except for a fixed-focus configuration, no?"
Huh? Beeps and clicks, buddy. That's all I'm hearing. - relinquish, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0As you speak I am writing a report on 1984.
- STKD, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0Uh... this would be an idea so obvious as to be un-patentable. I mean come on... It was even pointed out in Firefly.
- fibber, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0Mmmmmm Bobbies.
- slhilbert, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0This is one of those things that make you feel like, "Geez, I wonder why, I didn't wonder why this had been invented".
-s
http://www.getyourowntots.com
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 