Feeds

back to article Google files patent for eyewear that SHOOTS LASERS

Google has filed a patent for mounting twin lasers on the sides of a pair of glasses to display a keyboard on a user's body parts and use a camera to track a hand's gestures for control. "A pattern for a virtual input device can be projected onto a 'display hand' of a user, and the camera may be able to detect when the user uses …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Silver badge

the hardware could be a mugging magnet.

Doubtful. The potential mugger would have to know what they were for them to be attracted by them. Given that most (not all, admittedly) low rent criminals like muggers tend to be on the lower end of the intelligence scale I would find it unlikely that many of them pay enough attention to technology to identify them or know what they cost.

1
2
Mushroom

Especially if you kicked up the power and weaponized those babies!!

9
0
Holmes

mmm

If they can make money from them, they'll learn exceptionally fast.

3
0
Silver badge
Meh

Prior Art, you will probably find that Apple have got that one in their bottom draw.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Google goggle grabbing

You'd have nothing at all if you stole the glasses. They're powered by a large fanny pack, a cellphone connection, and a Google account. Then there's also the matter of them being more creepy than functional. The Google drones walking around Mountain View with them are a nerdly spectacle of curiosity rather than a source of envy.

0
1
Trollface

Mugging deterrent more like

Once the nasty man on the tube sees you shooting laser beams out of your eyes he is going to run a mile. Pretty sure Clark Kent could do this and that boy kicked ass.

Kryptonite equipped muggers may be an issue, but if you hang in those circles then you will need to find your own solution, or wait for Specsavers to start doing second pair free.

0
0

Also it's not much different to regular glasses. You can spend as much as you've got if you buy designer spec (not that I would even if I could)

0
0
Gold badge
Happy

Re: Google goggle grabbing

They're powered by a large fanny pack

Well, that's all the Brits hereabouts reduced to hysterical laughter.....

1
0
Bronze badge

prior art?

I am pretty sue that shark optometrists have been doing this for years.

7
0
Silver badge
Boffin

Sounds tricky

It sounds like you have to touch a particular point on the opposite hand while that point is jumping around every time you move your head or that hand, and while the touching hand is blocking the beam.

I think they are going to have to improve on that somehow before it becomes useable!

0
0
Bronze badge
Facepalm

Re: Sounds tricky

I can come up with a better idea in 10 mins. But would require payment from Google. Should I hold out for their call?

0
0
Bronze badge
Trollface

Re: Sounds tricky

Ok, make that 2 better ideas in 5 mins... But I'd not post them here. ;)

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Sounds tricky

I already have a better idea . . . and the phone isn't ringing.

0
0

Re: Sounds tricky

It sounds like you have to touch a particular point on the opposite hand while that point is jumping around every time you move your head or that hand, and while the touching hand is blocking the beam.

I would hope that it would be a little more sophisticated than that. I'd imagine the software will be able to recognise and track your hand as it moves relative to the camera.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Sounds tricky

Two things.

1) Unless you have Parkinson's, it won't be an issue.

2) It is less difficult than a sobriety test.

0
0
Coat

Lasers

Ok, so how long until they get rid of the glasses and do this with contact lenses? (Ohoh, did I just ruin someone's patent application?) ;-)

Umm, when are they going to mount them on sharks? (You knew that someone was going to ask that question, didn't y'all?)

As for the screen burn-in problems, that's mostly to do with sputtering of the electrodes by the electron/ion current in a plasma display (And, there was a similar burn-in problem for certain monochrome CRTs, caused by the electron beam, for a static image, burning the phosphor coating.). That shouldn't be a problem for lasers, at least as long as they don't go with an ultraviolet laser, which could cause some burn issues (Ohoh, did I just ruin someone else's patent application?).

Or, use a ultraviolet laser, and paint a phosphorescent strip on your arm, allowing the laser to make the phosphorescent area glow/fluoresce, seemingly by magic. Perhaps image this with a optically filtered camera (on the other side of the glasses?) to perform the detection. (Ohoh, another idea publicly disclosed?).

Oh, yeah, don't forget that most laundry detergents include a "whitening"/"brightening" agent, left behind after the wash cycle is complete, which is actually a fluorescent material.

Dave

P.S. I'll get my coat. It's the one with the optical brightening agent on it.

0
0

Re: Lasers

Do reliable, cheap UV lasers exist? I thought anything much beyond green was a bit of a pain to get working.

0
0
Stop

Reliable, cheap lasers.

Wicked Lasers sell lasers as a consumer product in various colours, including blue in its "Arctic" range. It's pretty powerful, at 1.25 W: it's enough to burn your retinas (or objects across the room).

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Sounds totally useless and cumbersome.

2
3
JDX
Gold badge

I think people said the same about Tablet computers too.

1
0
Bronze badge

I still say the same about tablet computers.

0
0
Silver badge

Didn't think I'd ever say this - but why bother with lasers?

These are augmented reality glasses. Just show the keyboard via the existing display facilities in such a way that it appears where your hand is. Less power required, less weight, less risk of annoying everyone if the hand recognition gets confused and doesn't shut off the laser when walking around.

8
0
Silver badge

Re: Didn't think I'd ever say this - but why bother with lasers?

These are not augmented reality glasses (or at least, the current Google glasses are not). They only display an image on a small part of your vision.

1
1

Re: Didn't think I'd ever say this - but why bother with lasers?

augmenting part of your visual area is still "augmented reality glasses" ...........

4
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Sod that, wake me up when........

What about using an array of lasers to project an image directly onto the retina?, proper argumented/virtual reality. I suppose you could use 3 beams (rgb) and have them track across and down the retina at a high enough rate that persistence of vision enables a full frame to be percieved. Have the tracking complete a full top/bottom scan in 60ms and the jobs a good un.

Imagine looking out on a rendered world rather than looking at a screen displaying a rendered world, it would be aces.

hmm, i wonder if a small projector could mimic the effect?

0
2
g e
Silver badge

Re: Sod that, wake me up when........

Already done quite a few years ago actually, IIRC, Virtual Retinal Display

0
0

Re: Sod that, wake me up when........

Can't see many sales for a device that shone lasers into the eye. Bit of a tricky thing to sell?

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Sod that, wake me up when........

LASIK/LASEK etc seem to sell reasonably well.

Though I see your point!

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Sod that, wake me up when........

Even the DIYers have already done this, using an off-the-shelf Microvision ShowWX pico projector which uses red, green & blue lasers to create the image by scanning line-by-line like a CRT. Though they put a strong filter on it so you don't get blinded by the lasers shining directly onto your retina:

http://hackaday.com/2012/04/09/projecting-video-directly-onto-the-retina/

0
0

Re: Sod that, wake me up when........

I ment when they can do it properly, all those systems mentioned either dont fully encompass the visual field or are wildly impractical/dangerous.

I dont want a display appearing to hover in front of me either, i want total visual immersion.

From the hackaday article....

"[Nirav]‘s build isn’t without its drawbacks, though. The exit pupil, or the apparent size of the image, is only about 1.5 mm wide and much too small to be of any real use."

Im glad people are working on this though, hopefully someone will suss it out before i die.

0
1
Silver badge

Re: Sod that, wake me up when........

I suspect the problem is that the human eye is not a camera.

The image you see is not the image captured by the retina, it's a composite generated in your brain that's made up from the data of many retinal images* - sort of like the massive mosaics NASA release

To make it more complicated, the retina has extremely variable resolution - in both colour and space!

- high spacial, but no blue at the fontema, lower as you get further away.

*Except that's wrong as well, but closer!

0
0
Silver badge

Was excited because I misread the headline...

... thought it said "...shoots lawyers"

5
0
Joke

Re: Was excited because I misread the headline...

Thats the lawyer gom jabbor test. If they file the patent for the device, they fail the self preservation test.

Actually, would filing it prevent cheap knock offs, actually reducing the supply available to the public?

0
0
Paris Hilton

Why did the first thing to go through my mind after reading...

"...display a keyboard on a user's body parts..."

... was the idea of them being projected onto Bulgarian Air Bags.

Icon for obvious reasons.

1
0
Silver badge
Meh

Apple will along soon ...

filing a patent for the same thing BUT using the left eye.

2
0
Gimp

prior art?

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2009/12/apple-mages-working-on-augmented-reality-magic.html

0
0
Silver badge

Re: prior art?

Microsoft has been at it too - Skinput - look at this video from 2010 demonstrating a numeric keypad projected onto your hand where all the 'buttons' can be 'pressed':

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3XPUdW9Ryg#t=119s

0
0
Anonymous Coward

A slight tweak..?

Instead of projecting onto a body part, how about projecting the keyboard onto an ATM or chip & pin machine?

If there was a way of allowing the glasses and other device to link together, and allow the order of the numbers to be scrambled, but both devices know where the numbers are, then even if someone sees you type in your pin and gets hold of your glasses, the numbers will be in a different position to the last time you typed your pin.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: A slight tweak..?

That would mess up everybody who remembers the number by pattern.

3
0
Silver badge
Thumb Down

The last sentence of the article worries me...

"The patent has yet to be approved, but if Google can come up with a working prototype the results could be very interesting indeed."

If you dont have a working prototype you should never be allowed to patent something!

Otherwise I am now patenting the invisible coffee machine that fills your mouth with coffee (at desired temperature and pressure) based on your thoughts. I dont have a working prototype yet but that shouldnt be a problem, should it?

2
1
Stop

Re: The last sentence of the article worries me...

Agreed - this may work but only with a lot of development and attention to detail. So if Google fail then my start up gets it working I have to pay them? I don't think so. A half baked idea shouldn't be patentable.

Patents aside, Google should stop wasting time with glasses. My experience is that you don't want to be wearing glasses unless you really have to. I'd much rather carry a smartphone than wear glasses.

0
0

This post has been deleted by a moderator

hmm.

"hey look I am sharing my veiw with friends over the internet on my glasses cam, look at this plane overhead, omg my eye lzers have just blinded the pilot and its crashing, atleast I caught it on camera"

Why do they even need lazers? Why not just get the glasses to map the users hand, and then display the keyboard on the glasses themselves using augmented reality, would be no need to even have lazers then and no risk of blinding someone

0
1
Anonymous Coward

Didn't Joe 90 have these?

If so, cheques payable to:

Gerry Anderson estate

Tracy Island

Pacific

1
1
Bronze badge

Scenario

You are socialising after work and wearing your subtle laser-wielding glasses and meet a person (of either gender) who you find interesting and attractive.

"Can I have your number?", you say.

"Yes", they say - because they do mean it," its 07771 1231456"

"I'll just put that in my phone" you say (and think "this will wow them - or not")

Laser on, tappy tappy on your sleeve.

"was that 1456? or just 456?" you say looking up at them.

"My eyes!", they yell, as the half-finished input is projected directly onto their retina.

0
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: Scenario

Any fool knows, the number is: 0118 999 881 999 119 7253

0
0

Old hat, but not Apple

Ted Talk about Six Sense tech does this very thing, 'cept the projecting device is on a lanyard around the neck.

Check it out... real cool stuff.

http://www.ted.com/talks/pattie_maes_demos_the_sixth_sense.html

0
0
Trollface

Now just put a pair of these on a shark and...

1
0
Terminator

Resistance is futile; you will be assimilated.

0
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.