Computer injected directly into the eyeball

[Still Waters]

Google is working on a computer that can be injected into people's eyeballs.

A new patent filing shows plans for a device that would stick into people's eyes and correct their sight, but also provide extra powers. Though the technology in the patent may never actually be released, it is another example of Google's apparent interest in getting computers onto and into people's eyes.

http://www.independe...l-a7007906.html

[Lilly]

Oh Hell No!

[Wickian]

With only the minor inconvenience of occasional ads being broadcast directly to your brain.

[Iron_Lotus]

[Leonardo]

How was Google able to get a patent for something so abstract? They haven't made an "eyeball computer", so the patent cannot be for that - and they cannot patent just the idea of injecting a nanocomputer into the eyeball, because that is a general process and so patenting it is not applicable. Did they "patent" the thesis they put forward, which isn't a patent but a copyright and only applies to the thesis itself, not the idea.

If some patent clerk granted Google a patent for a general process, then the patent system in the US is screwed-up beyond fixing.

[questionmark]

How was Google able to get a patent for something so abstract? They haven't made an "eyeball computer", so the patent cannot be for that - and they cannot patent just the idea of injecting a nanocomputer into the eyeball, because that is a general process and so patenting it is not applicable. Did they "patent" the thesis they put forward, which isn't a patent but a copyright and only applies to the thesis itself, not the idea.

If some patent clerk granted Google a patent for a general process, then the patent system in the US is screwed-up beyond fixing.

Apple was capable of patenting a square (and a jury awarded them millions because Samsung had violated the patent)... but to the device itself: wonderful, Google can finally control what you are doing on all levels!

[spartan max2]

interesting

[phantulum]

That just makes me cringe. I don't do eyes period.

[SyntheticBrilliance]

@Leonardo - Not sure you know much about U.S. patent law. Companies do frequently patent abstract ideas, Patent Trolling is actually a huge and pervasive problem for... well a lot of people actually. There is a company that actually has a patent on the function of an android app checking information against a database, and they sue people all the time - and win.

The range of what can be patented is extremely broad and vague when it comes to IT.

[Leonardo]

Apple was capable of patenting a square (and a jury awarded them millions because Samsung had violated the patent)... but to the device itself: wonderful, Google can finally control what you are doing on all levels!

@Leonardo - Not sure you know much about U.S. patent law. Companies do frequently patent abstract ideas, Patent Trolling is actually a huge and pervasive problem for... well a lot of people actually. There is a company that actually has a patent on the function of an android app checking information against a database, and they sue people all the time - and win.

The range of what can be patented is extremely broad and vague when it comes to IT.

@qm. Apple's "square patent" (actually, a rectangle with rounded corners) was at least associated with a real-world invention, but Google's patent is based on something entirely hypothetical. The technology to create a computer in the eyeball which corrects, not interferes with, vision hasn't been demonstrated and doesn't [yet] exist. The patent doesn't cover a process based on known, existing methods or technologies and it shouldn't be possible to patent the idea of "a computer in the eyeball" because that is far too generic - so what was the patent granted based upon?

If I was a patent clerk being asked to decide, I would say to Google "come back when you can demonstrate the invention, or show the technology to create it exists, otherwise application rejected."

@SB. I don't have a problem with patents granted for Intellectual Property which exists or can be demonstrated to exist as all the relevant technologies it relies on exist, but this is not the case with Google's "eyeball computer".

Edited May 1, 2016 by Leonardo

[Chibadiba]

Can't wait for the next eyephone to come out!

Edited May 1, 2016 by Chibadiba

[LV-426]

Google's patent is based on something entirely hypothetical. The technology to create a computer in the eyeball which corrects, not interferes with, vision hasn't been demonstrated and doesn't [yet] exist. The patent doesn't cover a process based on known, existing methods or technologies and it shouldn't be possible to patent the idea of "a computer in the eyeball" because that is far too generic - so what was the patent granted based upon?

How do you know the design is entirely hypothetical? As far as I can tell there have been no specifics released of the patent application.

Outside of the patent trolling that has crept into modern society, isn't the primary purpose of a patent to lay a claim to something new?

[Codenwarra]

Yuk Eeww. Yuk Eeew.

Just as well that two out of three patent applications are either abandoned or refused. However, it will be published and that is perhaps what Google wants.

Edited May 2, 2016 by Codenwarra

[Codenwarra]

How was Google able to get a patent for something so abstract? They haven't made an "eyeball computer", so the patent cannot be for that - and they cannot patent just the idea of injecting a nanocomputer into the eyeball, because that is a general process and so patenting it is not applicable. Did they "patent" the thesis they put forward, which isn't a patent but a copyright and only applies to the thesis itself, not the idea.

If some patent clerk granted Google a patent for a general process, then the patent system in the US is screwed-up beyond fixing.

Are you aware that two out of three patent applications are either abandoned or refused?

[jpjoe]

This program needs to be updated. https://www.newscientist.com/article/2084755-computer-generates-all-possible-ideas-to-beat-patent-trolls/

[+Hammerclaw]

Sounds like a Fantastic Voyage. If a young Raquel Welch is on board, I volunteer for the mission.

[Leonardo]

How do you know the design is entirely hypothetical? As far as I can tell there have been no specifics released of the patent application.

Outside of the patent trolling that has crept into modern society, isn't the primary purpose of a patent to lay a claim to something new?

The OP article (and patent) refer to an "injectible computer" and among the claims are it "corrects vision". The former is on a scale that does not yet exist (unless they want to replace a significant percentage of the eyeball itself) or is describing a liquid or semi-liquid computer, and the latter requires the "computer" to be transparent - again, a technology that does not yet exist.

I am very confident this patent describes a design using technologies that do not yet exist, and may never be shown to be viable for the purpose stated if they are invented. It is a frivolous patent .

Edited May 2, 2016 by Leonardo

[+Hammerclaw]

Google tried--and failed--once to replicate the Star Trek Next Generation Communicator.

[LV-426]

The OP article (and patent) refer to an "injectible computer" and among the claims are it "corrects vision". The former is on a scale that does not yet exist (unless they want to replace a significant percentage of the eyeball itself) or is describing a liquid or semi-liquid computer, and the latter requires the "computer" to be transparent - again, a technology that does not yet exist.

I am very confident this patent describes a design using technologies that do not yet exist, and may never be shown to be viable for the purpose stated if they are invented. It is a frivolous patent .

I'm no expert, but...

Toward computers that fit on a pen tip

"A prototype implantable eye pressure monitor for glaucoma patients is believed to contain the first complete millimeter-scale computing system."

And this article is over five years old.

[Leonardo]

I'm no expert, but...

Toward computers that fit on a pen tip

"A prototype implantable eye pressure monitor for glaucoma patients is believed to contain the first complete millimeter-scale computing system."

And this article is over five years old.

Indeed, but the "eyeball computer" the article talks of does not yet exist. If Google is working towards that, great - but demonstrate the technology exists before patenting it.

Edited May 2, 2016 by Leonardo

[MJNYC]

I will definitely pass. The thought makes me want to run the other way.

Edited May 2, 2016 by MJNYC

[paperdyer]

How was Google able to get a patent for something so abstract? They haven't made an "eyeball computer", so the patent cannot be for that - and they cannot patent just the idea of injecting a nanocomputer into the eyeball, because that is a general process and so patenting it is not applicable. Did they "patent" the thesis they put forward, which isn't a patent but a copyright and only applies to the thesis itself, not the idea.

If some patent clerk granted Google a patent for a general process, then the patent system in the US is screwed-up beyond fixing.

You'd be surprised what you can get a patent on. It depends on how good your lawyers are and the patent examiner. In my line of work, dyes and chemicals, there are tons of patents that should never have been issues as prior art was available. Even with the prior art, it's harder to invalidate a patent than to get one at times. Litigations can last for years and cost millions of dollars.

As far as this invention goes, it's just a patent application at this stage. IT could take years before a patent is issued, if at all.

[Zalmoxis]

I like the idea of nano-bots repairing body damage and correcting eye-sight. They could clean fat out of the circulatory system, kill diseases on a cellular level, give you infra-red vision and a million other awesome things.

I don't like the idea of computer software directly connected to my brain through my eyeballs. I like my man-made equipment as an external option, not merged into my body.

Edited June 7, 2016 by Zalmoxis