Thread 106265757

since lidar destroys camera CMOS what if we wore LIDARs in public on our clothes to combat privacy-invasive cameras

>>106265757 (OP)
you'd get arrested for destroying cameras

>>106265757 (OP)
That would be acceptable.

>>106265757 (OP)
that's just an IR laser
also this >>106265766 the message is clear "we will watch you and you can't do anything about it"

>>106265766
You'll do nothing Eglin AFB fag.

What is the impact on human eyes? Should this be investigated - possibly repeatedly? After all the engineers didn't seem the camera sensor issue coming either. You can nt help but wonder what else they perhaps forgot about.
Then again when I was in uni I was tasked with some ROS2 robot mapping stuff and such. i remember using my phone set up on the robots LIDAR height to take footage for a tutorial. You could see the LIDAR doing it's thing in the video. Camera was fine. Perhaps they just up the power for range and / or reliability?
>Destroying security cameras.
They will just dissect the visible light spectrum like the RF spectrum and confine and license shit for frequencies and treat it like any other EMI. Aka LIDAR mfgs w3ill be required to stick to a narrow frequency window and camera mfgs will just filter that.
Meanwhile in 10 years people will have misterious issues with eyesight, just like they all have allergies and are short sighted and no one exactly knows.

>>106265779
>>106265757 (OP)
Maybe you're yuropoors or no guns, but you know that full power IR lasers are a thing right?

>>106265757 (OP)
IR-filters and positioning. Car lidars don't need to scan the ceiling. The filters are more difficult as the IR wavelengths are used for night vision.

>>106265916
>What is the impact on human eyes?
IR is just as capable, if not more so, at destroying human retinas compared to visible wavelength laser light. If anything, they don't trigger the reflexive blink that visible laser light triggers, so you could be damaging your retinas without even knowing it from a stray reflection.
It's a particular concern of poorly manufacturered 532nm wavelength lasers that you can buy from Amazon, as the process for forming even a weak beam of visible green light involves an IR diode hundreds of times more powerful than the output of the resultant beam. And at even somewhat cold ambient temperatures, the crystals that convert the wavelength can let IR light pass, releasing damaging, but practically invisible light out into the environment.
t. I build lasers for fun

>>106265788
Eglin mentioned

I don't believe my eyes

>>106266018
>the blink
with most LASERS by the time you blink you got a bad spot.

>>106266032
Lasers that output a gaussian beam at 5mw can be tanked by humans that blink within 1/4th of a second. Anything beyond that could damage vision faster than you can blink, and is given a more dangerous classification, with safety goggles being highly recommended.
Any laser at or above 500mw is capable of damaging the retina just from the reflected spot on a wall.
All lasers are dangerous, but lasers that are diode-pumped with IR Diodes are more dangerous due to the possibility of IR leaking from improper or cold-attenuated filtering.

>>106266074
hey mr laser anon
you have seen styro's videos right?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBVlL0FNbSE
does this shit make your pp shrink in on itself?

>>106266352
No because despite the fact he looks like an '80s dudebro time traveller, he's a fucking genius and knows what he's doing.

>>106266018
>t. styropyro
So these janky LIDARs can poke holes in your eyeballs? Good to know

>>106266369
yeah ok but what if i went and built one and then put it on a robot arm with eye tracking
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2TUxoaKIsA

>>106266405
At that point you might as well just use a gun.

>>106266586
ok but what if it was infrared and bolted on a self driving car

>>106265916
LIDAR should not be powerful enough to cause damage to your eyes. Seems automotive is around 2mw.

>>106265766
How will they know who did it? Catch them on camera?

>>106265757 (OP)
could you use a non-visible version of LIDAR to achieve the same solution? Would be better to not dox yourself on cam before you fry their cmos.

>>106265916
No one knows, but more lidar = danger to eye for certain. Its basically laser beam being shined right to your eye, across everyone's eye in 360 degree rapidly.

>>106265757 (OP)
based LIDAR

>>106265757 (OP)
IR filters are a thing, and if this technology becomes somehow mainstream, there will be spot blocking mechanism at work the second a camera detect out of range IR signals. Like a literal hard spot following the signal while still recording. Like watching a little eclipse. You would need to physically damage such protection and pretty much using LIDAR with a ballistic gun instead.

>>106265757 (OP)
there are less invasive ways to do that, a.k.a. clothes with patterns that confuse algorithms that detect faces and such.

>>106266018
odd question, laser nerd
i wear transitions lens glasses, is their IR resistance enough you think to not have to worry about these types of IR lasers that are just out and about?

>>106266018
Man there need to be a reckoning
I don't want my retina burned

>>106265757 (OP)
Being China, that's probably just a powerful IR laser on that vehicle instead of something safe. People probably see spots when it drives by and don't know why.

>>106265757 (OP)
If it destroys camera CMOS
Then what the hell is it going to do to human eyes???

>>106268895
Depends on the wavelength. There are safe IR wavelengths that can't penetrate into the eyeball very well.

>>106268850
>muh chyna
Unitree's progress, Eglin fag?

>>106265927
Americans talking about guns as if they ever used or will use them against their zog

>>106268850
https://x.com/acknowledgeai/status/1947046013468061940

Here's America

>>106268977
https://x.com/Brick_Suit/status/1870509762569535602

Another for generic laser show destroying camera.

>>106265916
>>106265779
>>106266018
>>106266074
go back, redditor

>>106269026
>informative posts = redditor
Kys

>zoomers learning about IR leds and digital cameras for the first time
they grow up so fast

>>106265757 (OP)
That's only a problem with CHINESE TOFU DREG LIDAR.

>>106266377
Presumably, the wavelength these self-driving vehicles use is much less dangerous to the human eye. They apparently use 1500nm laser light, which doesn't reach the retina even at high powers. It can still very much be a problem for camera sensors, which may not have filtering for intense IR light.
There MIGHT have been some concerns about cornea damage, but I don't know. I mostly know about the dynamics of conventional consumer lasers, which typically stay within the visible spectrum.

>>106268699
>>106268787
See above.

>>106269981
No-one believes your propaganda videos Hernandez
Get back to praying to Fentanyl Floyd

>>106268936
they're living better than you and more free.

>>106265916
Cops have been showering you, in your car, with LIDAR for the better part of a 3 (three) decades now ( depends on your country and state )

>>106268977
Looks temporary, and fake, damage to me in that one. You can even see when he zooms out it goes back to normal.

>>106270299
>cornea damage
My understanding is that far-IR cornea damage is a thermal effect, not a one-and-done thing like retina damage, like microwave/RF eye damage. Cooks your cornea like an egg.

>>106271366
phones have multiple cameras

>>106266626
>camera destroyed
>check footage
>see guy aiming a fucking laser at it before it goes all purple
>oh yeah I remember that guy, get em boys

>>106265757 (OP)
>that hideous vomit inducing radiator grille
i fucking hate modern day "cars" (purses on wheels) and chinkoids that popularized this fucking putrid design choice, behead all of them

>>106271637
big grirr vely ruxurious

>>106265757 (OP)
>lidar
any laser with enough power will kill it
>>106265916
>What is the impact on human eyes?
as long as the laser is within a certain power range it's harmless. since chinks are building this shit, could be anything. it's probably why this camera shit itself.

>>106265757 (OP)
>chineze brand car destroying chineze cameras
friendly fire!

>>106265916
Considering vtubers has a lidar blasting their face for hours straight, I would say it's not that big an issue.