Recent Comments:
Powerful lasers damage eyesight of some Russian ravers {Engadget}
Jul 16th 2008 8:48PM Footage of the event, shown on Russian TV and available on the net, clearly shows that pulsed lasers were used (look for the dotted lines on the wall around 01:19). It also shows that the beams went directly into the audience -- no "refraction off the roof" here.
Pulsed lasers like this are totally unsafe for audience scanning. Pulses can pack up to 100x the power of continuous lasers which should be used instead. Every laser operator should know this. It is Laser Show Safety 101.
Apparently the lasers were originally intended for a sky or overhead show, which can be fine. But when the rain came and the ravers were under the tent, some idiot decided (ordered?) the lasers to go into the audience.
Fortunately, the eye damage appears to be retinal hemorrhages (bruises) instead of retinal burns. This is bad but not as bad as it could be.
Bottom line, audience scanning is allowed in most countries and is even covered by international engineering standards (IEC 60825-3). It is done safely thousands of times each day around the world. But a pulsed laser like the one in the video (probably Q-switched Nd:YAG) should NEVER be aimed at an audience.
Ravers Blinded By Laser Light Show Outside Moscow {Switched.com}
Jul 16th 2008 9:12AM Yes, the lasers were more powerful than a laser pen(!). The video shows that they were pulsed lasers -- look at the pattern on the back wall; it is composed of dots.
Pulsed lasers emit their light in short, powerful bursts. They are fine for sky or overhead use, but NEVER should be used for audience scanning. Whoever decided to re-aim the lasers from the sky as planned, into the audience, was completely and dangerously wrong.
Audience scanning is safe and legal when done appropriately. Note that you cannot extrapolate from a laser pen held close to a person, to a laser show where the laser is many meters away and is constantly in motion.
A Class 4 (most powerful) laser's light is supposed to be Class 1 (safe for exposure) by the time it reaches the closest audience member. Some shows may be over this limit, but not by the orders of magnitude which created the Moscow injuries. That takes exceptional ineptitude such as using a pulsed laser on a crowd.
-- Patrick Murphy, International Laser Display Assn.
Walt Mossberg's Got a Secret {The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW)}
Aug 8th 2007 10:31AM Son of a gun, the click (after unlocking) is back! I swear it was gone from after the August 1 update (1.0.1) until yesterday, August 7. I did not notice the click anytime during this period -- and I was listening for it. But this morning Aug. 8 I noticed it had come back.
Assuming I'm not going crazy, my suspicion is that the click came back at the same time as the "magic" update on Aug. 7 that added the "Send to Web gallery" button to the Photos application.
Too bad; I enjoyed stealthily turning on my iPhone...
Walt Mossberg's Got a Secret {The Unofficial Apple Weblog (TUAW)}
Aug 6th 2007 10:30AM On the original software, after you slide to unlock, there was an audible click from the speaker. (This happened even if you changed Settings to turn off the keyboard click.)
On the new 1.0.1, this "unlock" click is gone. I prefer this, since turning on the iPhone now can be completely silent.
Sanyo's AirCam-equipped backup camera provides virtual views {Engadget}
Aug 1st 2007 8:46AM There have been a number of heartbreaking news stories recently about parents & caregivers accidentally backing up over their children. One in particular quoted a pediatrician named Greg Gulbransen who said he was ultra-careful to avoid this, knowing the danger, yet his 2-year-old slipped out for the first time and got in a spot where he simply could not be seen. (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19353735/)
Many of the parents in these stories later bought backup cameras like the one in the article. Most importantly, they feel the cameras or similar rear-obstacle detection systems, should be standard safety devices just like seat belts, airbags, etc. (Rearview mirrors can't see short children, and most backovers are children under 5.)
Yes, they do add costs -- just like other auto safety devices. But IMHO it is worth it to add less than one percent to the cost of a car, in order to help prevent the 100 children's deaths, and 2500 injuries, that occur every year in U.S. auto backover accidents.
