News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Current guidelines for sun exposure are unhealthy and uns... by wolverine876 on Sunday May 22, 2022 @05:39PM (#31473073)
> no current consumer devices exist on market that can track these two numbers

And if there were consumer devices, the next problem would be accuracy. Based on a bunch of reading I did several years ago (so maybe out of date), consumer excercise trackers were very innaccurate in many ways. Exercise misinformation devices.

Re:Current guidelines for sun exposure are unhealthy and uns... by com2kid on Sunday May 22, 2022 @11:42PM (#31475134)
> And if there were consumer devices, the next problem would be accuracy.

Having worked on Microsoft Band, I can tell you that accuracy is a problem with UV exposure for a number of reasons, none of which involve the sensor itself.

Mostly it is around how people wear it, and was the sensor always facing the sun, people going in and out of the shade, long sleeves, and so forth. We settled on # of minutes of high exposure, I forget what index we considered "high" but basically it if it was above a certain threshold we considered you "in the sun".

The goal was sunscreen application reminders, no way would we have trusted it to tell people they had "enough" sun!

Re:Current guidelines for sun exposure are unhealthy and uns... by wolverine876 on Tuesday May 24, 2022 @12:26AM (#31487987)
Thanks; I am not surprised. It's hard to imagine how a sensor could be made to work cost-effectively - something that detects whatever ambient solar radiation slips through clothing? Whatever, consumers aren't going to pay for that.

But in fairness, the sensor doesn't work with how people use it. We could make a sensor that straps to user foreheads and requires them to always face the sun. When integration fails, we can point the finger either way, or just say it wasn't a good fit.