News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2. Parent comment

Re:Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2 by Eisenstein on Monday January 08, 2024 @02:02PM (#38916520)
I'm not sure I understand the metaphor. What is wrong with lasers? If they are pointed at your eye they could be harmful, but we don't have an 'eye' for the waves that are pointed at us, and a laser powerful enough to do damage to us for other reasons like heat would show likewise the same damage in non viewable wavelengths.

No one is contending that EMF waves can't harm people, since it is know that they can if they are of specific type and power. People are asking how it is possible the ones that exist that are of low power used for communication could harm some incredibly small number of people and not everyone, since it is a physical effect. If you flipped it and someone said they were immune to bullets, would you believe them?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2 by Podgajski on Monday January 08, 2024 @03:04PM (#38917332)
Do you just say things without even verifying them with a quick search?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3799025/

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamadermatology/article-abs...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2 by Eisenstein on Monday January 08, 2024 @03:16PM (#38917507)
And do you google for studies you don't read and use them to prove a point that the studies don't address?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2 by Podgajski on Monday January 08, 2024 @03:40PM (#38917789)
I have a google scholar alert for it and I read every study no matter the result. Why wouldnt I?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Apple Vision Pro available in the U.S. on February 2 by Eisenstein on Monday January 08, 2024 @04:17PM (#38918261)
Your linked studies said nothing relevant. Are you going to address my comment or not?
[ Parent | on HN ]