The point is with those IR sources you are exposed to, you normally don't look directly at the source.. so it's much more diffused than staring st the FaceID.
I am not against FaceID but I would like to see some testing data on the effects of IR, PWM have on your eyes if at all after repeatedly using it tens of time a day. If it turns out to be no having significant effects then well and good for all of us. But right now, the argument it being safe is based on assumptions without any scientific data.
I don't see any drawback in doing such a study.
I am not against FaceID but I would like to see some testing data on the effects of IR, PWM have on your eyes if at all after repeatedly using it tens of time a day. If it turns out to be no having significant effects then well and good for all of us. But right now, the argument it being safe is based on assumptions without any scientific data.
I don't see any drawback in doing such a study.
[doublepost=1542331438][/doublepost]
If there was some scientific basis for this being potentially dangerous, then they would be expected to. FaceID bathes your face in IR light, but your face is always being bathed in IR light at much higher intensities, especially if you go outside, or have ever been in a room with an incandescent light globe. Same goes for PWM. CRT screens flash at comparatively low frequencies, and have been used around the world, every day for hours, by many people. They have recently been replaced, but not for safety reasons. Fluorescent lights flash at very high frequencies, and again are around us for hours and hours every day. If there was some legitimate reason as to why PWM screens and FaceID were different to these other technologies which have been proven safe through the test of time, then fine, investigate away. But they haven't.
The difference is that x-rays have a clear scientific basis for being damaging. They can damage DNA, and that damage will accumulate. There is no such link for low intensity IR or PWM.
By far the most logical answer is 'nocebo'. There is no harm in a covertly conducted, independent study into the health effects. However there is harm in conducting a public 'trial-by-opinion', like is happening now. It will set back safe, technological progress, and will colour any potential future independent studies, as people will have difficulty staying impartial.
[doublepost=1542332429][/doublepost]