this post was submitted on 22 May 2025
388 points (97.1% liked)

Technology

70267 readers
4211 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 49 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] GoodOleAmerika@lemmy.world 2 points 2 hours ago

I call it BS

[–] ouRKaoS@lemmy.today 77 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] Flemmy@lemm.ee 15 points 6 hours ago (2 children)

Pitch Black is a underrated movie.

The third Riddick film is derivative of Pitch Black but imo, in the best ways possible. See it if you haven't. You won't be disappointed.

[–] Klear@lemmy.world 4 points 4 hours ago

I only saw it the theatre because I went to see Shyamalan's Signs and the reels didn't arrive so they played Pitch Black instead.

I was lucky.

[–] Kolanaki@pawb.social 52 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

Before now you had to kill a bunch of dudes, get sent to the darkest supermax prison, and pay some dude a few packs of Kools to get these bad boys.

[–] MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world 8 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Sturgist@lemmy.ca 4 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

.... MFR....do NOT leave us hanging!

[–] MilitantAtheist@lemmy.world 3 points 2 hours ago

Nothing much to say, been a game dev since 99, worked on a lot of games. Including escape from butcher bay.

[–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 28 points 23 hours ago

Did that, did a lot of that. There wasn't any doctor here who could shine my eyes. Not even for 20 menthol cools. Was anything you said true?

[–] 0p3r470r@lemm.ee 112 points 1 day ago (1 children)

“I have dark vision”

-future people

[–] MaggiWuerze@feddit.org 12 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

"Show me"

  • some dude with a flashlight
[–] Moriarty@startrek.website 9 points 7 hours ago (1 children)
[–] loki@piefed.social 5 points 5 hours ago

"Dumbass"

  • Future People's Friends
[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 77 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Pulptastic@midwest.social 6 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Yep, that won’t cause cancer.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 8 points 9 hours ago* (last edited 9 hours ago) (2 children)

It also doesn't have any accuracy whatsoever. It only makes it possible to detect infrared, but not to see where it came from. And being opaque they make you blind when wearing the lenses.

[–] barsoap@lemm.ee 7 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

We already can detect direction of infrared radiation, it's called being warm on one side but not the other. Technically also possible by, say, lying half-way under a blanket and half-way not, but sensory integration takes care of the ambiguity.

More interestingly, did you know we can see the polarisation of light?

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 4 hours ago

No I did not know that. Interesting.

[–] Empricorn@feddit.nl -5 points 8 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (1 children)

Without even visiting the article I can say with full confidence these contact lenses will not be opaque.

EDIT: We really don't have to go beyond the conceptual stage.

  • transparent: clear, all light goes through
  • translucent: clouded, some light goes through
  • opaque: wall, no light goes through

Yes, this includes ultraviolet light. If a contact lens is opaque, it blocks all light from passing through the eye's lens and cornea. It will never reach the retina to even be recognized as on or off! No opaque contact lens will ever be used. Please tell me if I'm wrong...

[–] Jtotheb@lemmy.world 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

Yes, this includes ultraviolet light.

Why? Does it also include x-rays? That’s only one step further on the electromagnetic spectrum. Seems arbitrary to stop at ultraviolet waves! Does that mean thin sheets of steel aren’t opaque? Or is the term “opaque”, without any modifiers attached, colloquially used to describe whether something permits visible light through?

For the record, they’re not opaque. The original article actually says they work better if you close your eyes.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 hour ago

Or with cosmic rays, not sure anything would be opaque.

[–] reluctant_squidd@lemmy.ca 52 points 1 day ago (3 children)

And blinded by security cameras?

Seriously, wouldn’t being able to see infrared basically make you see night vision cameras like they are street lights?

[–] corroded@lemmy.world 56 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Not really. While I don't have the exact numbers, the output of an infrared LED is no higher (usually) than an LED in the visible range. My security cameras have an array of 10 or so LEDs.

So looking at a security camera would be roughly equivalent to staring at a light bulb.

[–] reluctant_squidd@lemmy.ca 35 points 1 day ago

Ok, so not really bright, but visible. I smell the plot to a bank heist movie.

[–] moonlight@fedia.io 16 points 1 day ago

Also infrared cameras are pretty sensitive, so the lights often aren't that bright.

And the contact lens definitely won't make infrared light as bright as visibly light. It also likely doesn't line up exactly with the wavelength used by most cameras.

It would probably be noticeable but not appear very bright.

[–] Brokkr@lemmy.world 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Your phone's camera should be able to "see" the IR from security cameras and IR remotes. That can give you a sense for home much and in what direction they emit.

The sensitivities will be different, your phone should still help you some.

[–] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 3 points 7 hours ago

Phone cameras have very good IR filters. They aren't perfect which is why they can still see the LEDs, but they aren't anywhere near as bright.

I have an old RasPi camera with the IR filter removed, a remote control looks like someone used an old-school camera flash in pitch darkness. Which is how you can control your TV sometimes even from the next room over - especially at night with no ir from the sun - shine the remote at the wall, and the wall blinks bright enough for the TV to see it, often even after a few reflections.

[–] Psythik@lemm.ee 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

So don't stare directly at them, then?

Infrared lights don't need a lot of wattage to do their job. They wouldn't be any more obnoxious than a light bulb.

[–] muhyb@programming.dev 41 points 1 day ago (1 children)

even with eyes closed

Not sure I would want something like that.

[–] Iamsqueegee@sh.itjust.works 28 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You would if you don’t like surprises.

Big brother: “Okay, open your mouth and close your eyes, and I’ve got a big surprise!” Closes eyes: “not this time, fucker”

[–] qarbone@lemmy.world 23 points 1 day ago (1 children)

How would you get a surprise in the mouth when you're stuck headfirst in the washer?

[–] whiskybourbon@lemmy.world 19 points 23 hours ago

This is real bro not step bro. Totally different shenanigans involved.

[–] Psythik@lemm.ee 7 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

Maybe it's just my ADHD, but the article doesn't seem to be clear on something: do these contacts actually allow you to see into near-infrared as it exists, or do they merely shift the light into a spectrum we can see, the way cameras do? I'm hoping for the former, but I doubt we have the tech to allow us to see new colors simply by putting on a pair of contacts.

(Also, the mental image of scientists putting tiny little contact lenses on mice is hilarious to me.)

[–] bluemellophone@lemmy.world 9 points 17 hours ago

To counter the first theory, a contact cannot change the physical biology of the photon detecting cells (rods and cones) in the back of your eye. Nothing can, short of modifying your genetics.

So you can either become part mantis shrimp, or shift the wavelengths into the spectrum your biology already can absorb and interpret.

[–] Bubs@lemm.ee 25 points 1 day ago (1 children)

TL;DR from Wikipedia: In photon upconversion, two or more incident photons of relatively low energy are absorbed and converted into one emitted photon with higher energy.

Basically photons are combined into a photon that is nearer in wavelength to visible light.

[–] Psythik@lemm.ee 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Aww that's disappointing, but I'm not surprised. Otherwise we'd be using this tech to help colorblind people tell the difference between red and green.

[–] mbirth@lemmy.ml 8 points 14 hours ago (1 children)
[–] Psythik@lemm.ee 3 points 12 hours ago
[–] mp3@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

It shifts the wavelength into the visible range, it doesn't grant you the ability to see new "colors". It's more like a translation into a color you already know.

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 4 points 23 hours ago

Well that's a lame perk tree

[–] unphazed@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Whatever happened to the jellyfish eyedrops?

[–] hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl 17 points 1 day ago (2 children)

jellyfish eyedrops?

Why would they need eye drops? They are submerged in salty water.

[–] unphazed@lemmy.world 7 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

It was an eyedrop that used a protein or something from jellyfish, that affected human eyes to temporarily see better in low light. Been years since I've heard anything about it. Another sensationalized "breakthrough" I guess.

[–] DempstersBox@lemmy.world 1 points 7 hours ago

So, the articles are old, but chlorin e6 mixed with insulin and DMSO in saline gives a temporary boost to nightvision.

Sounds fucking awesome, and the ingredients all seem fairly easy to acquire. No commercial product, but why would there be?

[–] darklamer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 23 hours ago (1 children)
[–] hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl 2 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Yes. Light receptors maybe, but eyes...

source

... and light-sensing organs called ocelli, which can sense the presence and absence of light. Additionally, some jellyfish have sensory structures called rhopalia, which contain receptors to detect light, chemicals and movement.

Oh wait! This is unexpected:

... One group of jellyfish, the cubozoan jellyfish, have complex eyes... with lenses, corneas and retinas in their rhopalia.

Huh. Wiki agrees:

box jellyfish are unique in the possession of true eyes, complete with retinas, corneas and lenses.[13] Their eyes are set in clusters at the ends of sensory structures called rhopalia

Whoa.

[–] darklamer@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 5 hours ago

WTF!? [subscribe to jellyfish facts]

[–] Shawdow194@fedia.io 5 points 1 day ago