this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2025
129 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

67422 readers
4439 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 33 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] noodles@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)
[–] Landless2029@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

Omg a VR display. Yes.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 29 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (7 children)

What is the use case for 127000 PPI?
AFAIK retina start about 450 for phones, that are already pretty close view.
The closest id probably VR that can utilize 1000+. (AFAIK 2000 is REALLY good!)
But that leaves more than a factor 60 that I can't see much of a use case for?
VR can maybe use 5000, I seriously doubt it will make any difference above that.

So where is more than 5000 necessary?

[–] echodot@feddit.uk 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I'm thinking lithography. The higher the DPI the smaller you can make your components.

SLA printers would definitely benefit, provided these tiny LEDs can put out the required UV.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Maybe for low end lithography, you can't use normal light for anything high end, already at 7nm it requires EXTREME ultra violet. And the lamps for that cost 100s of millions, to make the shortwave light necessary.

But for low end, it could possibly be used for ultra fast and cheap cycle between tape-out and production?

[–] plz1@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Non-human use cases, would be one. Like, having the ability for machines to "see" highly detailed imagery via camera. Just spitballing. My eyes are shit, so a screen that cool will never be of use.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Maybe, but it would be more logical to simply bypass screen to eye camera, to just transmit the signal from the original camera directly.
But hypothetically yes, that could possible be a use in a future scenario.

[–] Amroth@feddit.it 21 points 1 day ago (2 children)
[–] Landless2029@lemmy.world 1 points 9 hours ago

127000 PPI e-ink display. Allows transparency.

Needs some kind of extremely tiny body heart driven power source, WiFi chip and processor...

Closer and closer to cyberpunk era tech (and oppression)

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 9 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Very creative, maybe some day. But I think it will require serious developments in other areas too. Like technologies we don't even have yet.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

we already have tiny flexible screens and the means to beam video data to it wirelessly. we also have microscopic chip litography to handle it.

[–] SeekPie@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

But no small or translucent batteries

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 3 points 16 hours ago

the obvious solution to this problem is running a convenient wire from your eyeball 🤪

[–] monarch@lemm.ee 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

don't necessarily need one if they are power efficent enough.

[–] SeekPie@lemm.ee 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

How would you power them without a battery? It doesn't matter if it's really power efficient if it isn't getting any power.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 2 points 16 hours ago

you can beam tiny amounts of it ota. it just needs to be very power efficient.

[–] monarch@lemm.ee 3 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Wirelessly. Like an NFC tag.

Not saying it would be super practical but if you custom shaped them you could put a wire coil around all of the non seeing parts of the eye.

[–] dzsimbo@lemm.ee 3 points 18 hours ago

Just make it sodium based, and a good crying jag will replenish the battery.

[–] umbrella@lemmy.ml 1 points 19 hours ago

im not saying it wouldnt be a challenge, but isnt solar panel tech possible here?

it just has to be really power efficient.

[–] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

For Christmas tree decorations!

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

That's it! An ultra fine web of microscopic lights simulating the Christmas tree shrouded in fog.
They have to hurry up and make that, I want to see what that looks like.

What a cool idea. 👍

[–] surewhynotlem@lemmy.world 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

VR but right up in my face?

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

You can't make lenses to focus properly at shorter distances I think, or you would get an extremely narrow FOV.

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

vr, ar, xr, medical technology, etc...

[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 18 points 1 day ago (1 children)

So they can make my TV smaller? Nice.

[–] Num10ck@lemmy.world 14 points 1 day ago (2 children)

or maybe they can make 8k per eye AR glasses?

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I think 8K can be made with 2k ppi.

[–] BakedCatboy@lemmy.ml 2 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago) (1 children)

The bigscreen beyond used 1 inch displays so this could be useful for getting much higher resolutions in a smaller form factor. I don't think my Index displays are even as big as 4 inches so I guess that explains why all the super high res headsets are so huge.

Edit: my index screens are under 3", just did a lens swap so I have the old eye tubes handy

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 16 hours ago

There are many considerations like FOV would be better with a bigger screen, I think 4" would probably be the max, but still that's only at 2k ppi, there'¨s a looong way to 127K. Even with a 4k ppi screen you can do 8k view with just 2".

[–] Goun@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 day ago
[–] ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net 2 points 1 day ago

Maybe even 16k.