> Two-thirds [of participants] reported medium to high user satisfaction with the device.
I don’t know much about medical trials but this seems surprisingly low to me, especially given that the study population is presumably predisposed to liking the device (since they opted-in to an experimental study).
Did the implant not work in these cases or were there other quality-of-life issues? I wish university press releases on science were less rah-rah and presented more factual information. I guess that’s what the NEJM article is for.
It seems that it’s black on white, forms, and reading involves adjusting zoom and brightness until you focus a single word at a time?
And it still uses your regular peripheral vision so the experience merging the two might be uncomfortable.
Not discounting the success at all, but anything messing with your senses is probably very hard to adapt to unless it’s pretty much a perfect match with the experience you’re used to.
Very very cool. I have this condition - I got it randomly ("idiopathic" as opposed to age-related) when I was 22. At the time it wreaked havoc on my mental health.
The Phosphenes[0] patients sense will depend on what is left of the retina. People using earlier systems reported some interpolation happened. Maybe that is true of this device too.
[0] - that is the name for the image the brain manifests in response to signals received by the visual cortex. Most of us experience them when we close our eyes and rub them, or maybe just see stuff that is unreal.
The interpolation would tend to at best half a pixel? And the phosphor lag (like on a tube) would be an issue surely?
Are there instances of single eye outcome where the subject has drawn perceived image so we can understand how this exposes into conscious visual stimuli?
Even just a flash on the left == left object vs flash on the right == right object would be a useful signal compared to zero. But describing it as "vision" would be stretching it.
378 pixels is a few letters at 10x18 so it's 2-3 words. Again, massive gains on nothing, but it's beyond "large print" its "large print with a magnifying glass" and it might be phosphor burn colour against black or a foggy field, or a number of things.
To be clear, this is amazing stuff and hats off to anyone who helped make it happen, but let's not assume we're in "snow crash" territory just yet.
> Two-thirds [of participants] reported medium to high user satisfaction with the device.
I don’t know much about medical trials but this seems surprisingly low to me, especially given that the study population is presumably predisposed to liking the device (since they opted-in to an experimental study).
Did the implant not work in these cases or were there other quality-of-life issues? I wish university press releases on science were less rah-rah and presented more factual information. I guess that’s what the NEJM article is for.
It seems that it’s black on white, forms, and reading involves adjusting zoom and brightness until you focus a single word at a time?
And it still uses your regular peripheral vision so the experience merging the two might be uncomfortable.
Not discounting the success at all, but anything messing with your senses is probably very hard to adapt to unless it’s pretty much a perfect match with the experience you’re used to.
Very very cool. I have this condition - I got it randomly ("idiopathic" as opposed to age-related) when I was 22. At the time it wreaked havoc on my mental health.
I am so sorry you went through this. How are you doing now?
I got an ICL (Intra Collamer Lens) implant at 22 (25 now) and that ruined my night vision with ghosts and glares.
Discussion from last week: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45653639
This is the sort of technology that will actually bring benefit into our lives.
Can't wait to see what advancements will be made in vision-related healthcare over the next 20 years.
I'm imagining a hacker sending infrared signals to a user to upload whatever image straight to their brain.
Yes, we can even call it “snow crash” ;)
And not a corporation to send advertising? What kind of cyberpunk dystopia is that?
This is incredible technology. Now do computer glasses with AI and you won’t need separate devices like phone.
Resolution, color depth?
378 pixels, 1bpp
The Phosphenes[0] patients sense will depend on what is left of the retina. People using earlier systems reported some interpolation happened. Maybe that is true of this device too.
[0] - that is the name for the image the brain manifests in response to signals received by the visual cortex. Most of us experience them when we close our eyes and rub them, or maybe just see stuff that is unreal.
The interpolation would tend to at best half a pixel? And the phosphor lag (like on a tube) would be an issue surely?
Are there instances of single eye outcome where the subject has drawn perceived image so we can understand how this exposes into conscious visual stimuli?
Even just a flash on the left == left object vs flash on the right == right object would be a useful signal compared to zero. But describing it as "vision" would be stretching it. 378 pixels is a few letters at 10x18 so it's 2-3 words. Again, massive gains on nothing, but it's beyond "large print" its "large print with a magnifying glass" and it might be phosphor burn colour against black or a foggy field, or a number of things.
To be clear, this is amazing stuff and hats off to anyone who helped make it happen, but let's not assume we're in "snow crash" territory just yet.
> Resolution is limited by the size of pixels on the chip. Currently, the pixels are 100 microns wide, with 378 pixels on each chip.
> the PRIMA device provides only black-and-white vision
And so the cyborg era begins.
https://static.wikia.nocookie.net/star-trek-universe-rpg/ima...
This is cool, glad to see people doing awesome things like this
That's so cool.