3 years ago5,000+ Views
What would you do with Android displayed right on your skin?
View more comments
@JonPatrickHyde Wow, that's a lot for just a prototype. I hope they can actually pull through. if not them, then some other company
Thanks @WAYNEPiper This immediately stood out as a new innovative product. The concept seems awesone, if they can make it work like the promotion. @JonPatrickHyde Yea, I was reading there explanation for why they are raising funds outside of crowdsourcing, discussing the individual investing beats crowdsourcing because there is no guarantee or surety for crowdsource investors. Their financial strategy sounds questionable to me, as I would want some structure and accountability to where and how my investment is being used.
@DanWest - Exactly! I mean this tech is next-level thinking - inspired from science-fiction... but sometimes the most innovative developments in technology are... In 1966 when Star Trek played on TV for the first time and Kirk talking into his communicator - that was some unimaginable stuff. And now we are looking at a device far - far more sophisticated that is not only believable - but you and I know we both want one! LOL. Makes my Galaxy S5 look like a toy! I think it's a great idea. It's obviously a jump forward in technology. But it's also going to take a lot of R&D to make it "fool proof" for the general consumer - that takes a lot of resources. When you look at how they are raising the funds - they state that if they can get $1 from everyone - that's the sort of thing that raises a bunch of red flags with me. I have raised funds from legitimate - licensed - angel investors before - I was the co-founder of a successful internet tech start-up in 1998 - and I can tell you that the way they are doing this is either very professionally - immature - that's the best word I can find - it's the way that someone who either has zero business experience or won't listen to more experienced mentors goes about doing something like this. There has to be ROI - return on investment. There has to be a disclosure of projections, costs, etc... full disclosure - they're avoiding regulation by going after really small amounts of money with nothing offered in return other than "we'll put your name up on our wall of fame" - grocery stores do this for people who donate their change to various charity fund raisers... it's not something a tech company does. There's the question of IP rights - patent and trademark protection - so many vitally important things to protecting your intellectual property - your innovative concept - and protecting your investor's funds - that are not being discussed here. If this is a viable concept - a product that can be done - putting it out there this way - Samsung, Apple and any other tech company with millions - tens of millions - of dollars for R&D should already be building their first prototypes. _______________ Then there is the practical issue that I know a lot about as a working director of photography - a light source with the ability to project a high-contrast color image enough lumens - in a normally lit room or especially outdoors in daylight - will require a significant power source - and get really hot. I just don't see them fitting the projection hardware - required battery source - and the sensor hardware into something that size. Unless it only works in very dark environments - and has a battery life of under 10 minutes total. That is really the elephant in the corner of the room no one is talking about.
Agreed! After some additional research on the financials, it does seem a bit shady (best word I could come up with LOL). I was discussing the feasibility of this device with one of my partners, and thr power source that would required to make this work for any amount of usable time would be much larger than what could be fit into this device in its current iteration... unless they were actually able to create a real life arc reactor. (see Tony Stark) LOL
WAIT! You didn't tell me Stark Industries was developing this? "Tony Stark was about to build it, in a cave, from scraps!" LOL. I agree. The power consumption plus the heat generated - and you'll need lens tech - that is able to distort a 2-dimensional image at a severely distorted angle - the pitch difference to make a rectangular image display correctly at such a low angle from the projector - this has to be done without distortion or quality loss. Let's not even talk about distortion issues displaying on people with extremely hairy arms. Or the issues this uneven and someone reflective surface (hair shafts can reflect light) will have on the sensors.