Not  sure if it is dodgy - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: DuPe
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2022, 06:40:20 pm
content: https://www.mojo.vision/mojo-lensBut for me some of the claims seem extremly futuristic to me: Battery, focusing, data transfer...what do you think?

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2022, 06:43:22 pm
content: Don't ya love transhumanism!

author: DuPe
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2022, 06:47:28 pm
content: that was not my question.Just wanted to know if you think this could be technically possible

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 05, 2022, 06:52:13 pm
content: Without considering anything else, claim:Quoteis an outright lie. It cannot possibly be true. Although technology is called microLED, it's micro for LED, not for pixel/display size which are huge. microLED is a very expensive technology for huge displays, not for tiny ones. So this must be an investment scam.

author: DuPe
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2022, 06:54:45 pm
content: "investment scam"was my first thought as well

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2022, 07:24:24 pm
content: And all this powered by batteries inside the lense... sure.

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2022, 07:42:04 pm
content: They could ask WiGL to help with the power supply.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2022, 07:54:41 pm
content: The implanted retina stimulators are powered by induction. This has been done for decades now for a range of active implanted devices. So they need an external device (which includes the camera, processing, data link and power link.)This "lens", though, seems to be powered by "solid-state batteries" that would fit inside the lens. For those who know what it is, they are claiming it's a form of scleral lens. Those are significantly "larger" than the usual contact lenses, but still pretty thin to fit anything much inside the lens. Also, scleral lenses are a pain and used by people who often don't have a choice. Making essentially a "gadget" with this type of lens is in itself a weird idea - if it were feasible at all.

author: DuPe
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2022, 08:10:48 pm
content: Quote from: madires onTodayat 20:42:04>They could ask WiGL to help with the power supply>https://www.startengine.com/wigl

author: CatalinaWOW
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 05, 2022, 08:48:05 pm
content: I see nothing that violates laws of physics here. Depends on what they are promising investors. If they are offering a small chance of a viable product in the next decade, or something even less ambitious, I would say risky, but not dodgy. If they are promising higher chances of success or a shorter time interval it moves them right into the dodgy scam area.

author: BrianHG
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 06, 2022, 01:27:20 am
content: Ohhhh, the eye problem lawsuits would hit them like a sledge hammer.Even the ear bug stupid law enforced low volume issue with modern audio players...An eye is worth over 100x the $ lawsuit.

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 06, 2022, 05:23:03 am
content: Quote from: wraper on July 05, 2022, 06:52:13 pmI see the BBC has written an article about it:https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61318460QuoteSo they say he has a working prototype that he is going to try,I don't seem many pictures apart from the one that looks to me like a cad image and a tiny one on a low resolution finger.I wonder if that finger is a from stock photo?QuoteHere we go again smart this smart that and I count 16 of them.Say it is true I am still not happy about thisbuzzworld bullshit:Smart, optimisations, smart lens, smart sensors, smart lensetechnology, smartphone, smartwatchIf I was a musician I wouldn't want that text readout slapped in a fixed part of my vision or appearing on and off. I would want to freely look at things by moving my head. I'd find that very annoying already with webapages.QuoteCorrect me if you think I am wrong but I don't remember Google glasses being referred to "smart glasses" or maybe I wasn't paying enough attention to it.https://www.google.com/search?q=google+smart+glasses&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3A2008%2Ccd_max%3A2016&tbm=2008 - 2016https://www.google.com/glass/start/Nope, it says "smarter" not smart.Archive 2013:https://web.archive.org/web/20130315011941/http://www.google.com/glass/start/what-it-does/No "smart" in there. In fact they seem quite clear what it does.QuoteWell why don't start using the word "SMART" with a bit more care then than just plastering it everywhere on everything like 16 times in the BBC article. It sounds insulting to me when applied in this way that could mean everything to an empty meaning.Would something like this: "Automatic/programmable micro lenses" or even "Mojo Microlens" sound better? instead of using the word "smart" in it.That would catch my confidence a bit better that at least I know they can be adjusted or altered in some way to assist vision.The word "smart" added with the word "glass" makes me thing that they will set it to "think" for the user and the user is somewhat stupid and confused and anything other than the size and fitting is lie a one size must fit for all.I'll find it interesting to see how this turns out, if it is true or not claiming he has that working prototype to the BBC.I wonder what ThunderF00t would think of this.

author: DuPe
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 06, 2022, 07:39:19 pm
content: Thanks folks for all your well thought opinions.I will not invest in that undertaking

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 06, 2022, 07:59:03 pm
content: Yeah. The state-of-the-art solid-state batteries in the volume we could figure out here would not store much energy at all. There probably would never be enough energy to make this work, as far as we can guess what it would be supposed to do, more than a few seconds between recharges - which I'm guessing would happen inductively as I mentioned earlier.Another "interesting" feasability point that comes to mind: how could the eye be ever able to focus on a display so close to the cornea (while still being able to see clearly what's in the real environment)? I'm perplexed. It would literally be something like 1mm away from the cornea or so. That itself would be pretty challenging. Would require some lens that (at least off the top of my head) would be very hard to fit in such a tiny volume, and that would have a completely different focal than that of the part of the lense that you'd see through.Another point would be strictly controlling the heat. You wouldn't want some device to heat up your eye.But as a couple of us said, even if that were at all feasible, that would be way too much of a medical risk for something that would be a gadget and not an "essential" medical device.So yeah, if you have some money to invest, I'd suggest looking elsewhere. Maybe invest in a semiconductor foundry? =)

author: DuPe
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 06, 2022, 08:50:25 pm
content: Quote from: SiliconWizard onTodayat 20:59:03

author: Daixiwen
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: July 07, 2022, 07:06:05 am
content: But think of the possibilities! They could stream ads right to your eyeballs, and you would be forced to see them! Even closing your eyes wouldn't work. We truly live in interesting times

author: MrMobodies
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 07, 2022, 08:14:00 am
content: Joke: They could use them as "digital billboards" in the night when you are trying to sleep.

author: AVGresponding
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 07, 2022, 12:57:30 pm
content: Isn't that already a thing in some sci-fi book/series/film? There are no commercials on TV any more, they just broadcast them straight into your dreams? I forget where I saw/read it.

author: pcprogrammer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 07, 2022, 03:56:28 pm
content: And even if it is feasible and available to the public, how fast would it be banned from using it when driving your car.Especially whenQuote from: Daixiwen on July 07, 2022, 07:06:05 amused in this wayDriving quietly along and wham an ad comes up and you freak out, loose control over the steering wheel and cause a major accident. Who to blame then

author: BrokenYugo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: July 07, 2022, 04:50:44 pm
content: Quote from: AVGresponding on July 07, 2022, 12:57:30 pmFuturama?https://youtu.be/hlCrcMeVZHs

author: TomWinTejas
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 08, 2022, 04:22:54 pm
content: The CEO is Drew Perkins, who has an impressive background in technology. He was one of the authors of PPP, was one of the founders of Lightera and Infinera (optical networking companies), so he doesn't seem like your typical huckster.

author: Damperhead
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2023, 08:30:40 am
content: Hands-on: Mojo Vision’s Smart Contact Lens is Further Along Than You Might Thinkhttps://www.roadtovr.com/mojo-vision-smart-contact-lens-ar-hands-on/I am quite skeptical about the Mojo Vision’s Smart Contact Lens. If we look at those Mojo Vision pictures of the lens. They cannot be functional. And why on earth would they have used green solder mask and solderable SMT passive components. Flex wiring doesn't look like a very realistic implementation either. However, I guess sales photos like these can get funding these days - unfortunately. Interesting as an idea but the implementation impossible with the presented technology.

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2023, 10:25:27 am
content: Quote from: Damperhead on May 15, 2023, 08:30:40 amThat web page reflects last year's status (June/July 2022). In the meantime, Mojo Vision have admitted that they can't get the lens to work, and they are "pivoting" to pure LED displays, supposedly with up to 28,000 DPI:https://www.mojo.vision/news/a-new-directionhttps://www.mojo.vision/technology"Thank you, dear investors, we will spend the rest of your money pretending to develop something else."

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 15, 2023, 08:47:24 pm
content: No way!

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2023, 03:14:52 pm
content: QuoteHave they, or is that just a cynical interpretation? There are many reasons why things don't make it to production, and whilst 'not working' is one it's conceivable that a potential product does 'work' but still fails to make the grade. In this case, 'not work' could cover the display, the lens, the power, the comms, etc. Did they say anything about what the issue is? All I got from your link was that they were 'pivoting' and no actual reason given.

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2023, 03:46:02 pm
content: Quote from: PlainName on May 17, 2023, 03:14:52 pmIt is an interpretation, but I would not call it a cynical one.If you read their "new direction" announcement, it is the usual weazel story: "We have made great progress, but the mean capital market does not want to fund further development -- not our fault if course, but due to the global economy." Yeah, sure. They are years past their target launch date, and all they got is this "prototype" they shopped around last year.Why haven't they demonstrated the thing switched on, projecting something, onto a white screen on the bench, a single time? That promo video they produced isverycarefully worded to avoid saying what actually "worked" in the prototype...Edit: Trying to get the Vimeo link to display...Code:https://vimeo.com/725030619/9cbd6749ad

author: PlainName
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2023, 04:00:42 pm
content: OKItiscynical, though. Which, I suppose, is only to be expected in this topic. Perhaps I should have asked if it were 'overly cynical'.

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2023, 04:21:41 pm
content: Ok, I will take "adequately cynical".

author: Kim Christensen
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2023, 05:27:27 pm
content: These morons can't even design a proper webpage without a bunch of white/black space.Seems like a bunch of BS to bilk investors.

author: Damperhead
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2023, 05:38:48 pm
content: It is entertaining to look at these management slides. A small start-up really needs a big organization to get investors' money wasted. I guess this company has an HR department with naturally several hierarchical layers.

author: RJSV
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 19, 2023, 06:37:24 pm
content: Kind of ironic, that 'VISION' Company publishing blurry photographs of the HR Dept.Too blurry to read the names or titles of those 8 or so people.Actually, any formal company presenting blurry photos, wanting investors, is shoddy, a bit.

author: ebastler
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 19, 2023, 06:51:38 pm
content: Quote from: RJHayward on May 19, 2023, 06:37:24 pmNah, it's just the screenshot which was posted here that makes the lettering a bit blurry, to limit file size. The original resolution on their web page is fine, and there are even bio sketches for each clickable portrait:https://www.mojo.vision/aboutWhat I love about that page is how it opens with the headline "Introducing Our Innovators", and then immediately changes its mind as you scroll down, introducing the management team instead.