backtop

Print 72 comment(s) - last by JKflipflop98.. on Aug 15 at 9:40 AM

Wicked Lasers' infamous S3 Arctic Spyder III  (Source: Wicked Lasers)

One lucky user's Spyder III, which they received this month.  (Source: Laser Pointer Forums)

While George Lucas is threatening to sue Wicked Lasers for the Spyder III's similiarity to the lightsaber, Lucas liberally "borrowed" the design of the original lightsaber himself from the Graflex camera (see flashbulb handle).  (Source: Graflex Blog)
Laser weapon is shipping, but some are angry at a price raise; company called previous lasers "lightsabers"

Wicked Lasers caused quite the stir when it announced its beastly 1 W Wicked Lasers S3 Arctic Spyder III, a laser which can burn human flesh and easily blind.  The powerful device quickly drew the ire of Star Wars creator George Lucas who noted that the device looked like a lightsaber.

Despite a cease and desist letter from Lucas, the company appears to be shipping its revised kit, and some customers have received it.  A video of it in action, burning through plastic CD-pack spindles and tape can be seen here.

One thing that some customers are encountering is frustrations in contacting the Hong Kong-based company.  A reader writes us:

I had an order of $200+postal, and now they e-mailed asking for more money (+$99.99) for the 'safe' version of the infamous laser.
I wrote back asking if they would still deliver my order at the original price, without the safety feature (they did say it was possible,
but didn't say if it would still cost $99 extra, that's why I asked).

I've been trying to reach them for the last two weeks, and it looks like they stopped caring.

Before their announcement about Lucas suing them, there was no such problem. I even have a green laser pointer from them, but I ordered
that a year ago, way before they came out with the artctic hype.

...

The fact that they are STILL selling it on their site while they can't even fulfill 1 month old orders - well, it makes me mad.

As the reader indicates, Wicked Lasers seems to have bumped the price of the device, given its popularity.  It's unclear if the bump has anything to do with the potential legal action from Lucas, as the reader infers.

An additional thing noted by commenters on various laser pointer forums is that the laser -- as it ships  -- is not ideal for burning stuff, even if you swap the new "training lens" for the standard lens.  To get really high quality burns, you have to order the "Expanded Lens Cap Kit" (select the drop down on the laser's order page) and use the focusing lens.  The kit retails for $24.99 plus shipping, but expect there to a be a long waiting list.

There are a couple of interesting updates in the Lucas vs. Wicked Lasers battle as well.  While Wicked Lasers CEO Steve Liu claimed "we would never use any comparison like that to 'Star Wars' or a lightsaber or anything like that", the company did in fact make such a comparison.  An archived page from 2004 reveals the company wrote the following text to describe a past product:

Light Saber
Our modification yields bright beams like this can be seen in dark areas with no aid of smoke!

Also of interest is the fact that George Lucas did not make the original lightsaber design, but rather constructed it from the bulb attached of an old Graflex 3 cell vintage camera.  Lucas merely added some rubber grips and a loop attached to the base.  Though no legal action was reportedly ever taken against Lucas, he may have feared it, as he avoided using the term "lightsaber" in the prequel trilogy he recently released.  Thus it seems odd that he himself is now pursuing legal action against those who make lightsaber look-alikes.

An interesting thread on inexpensive fan-built replicas of Luke Skywalker's iconic Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope Jedi lightsaber (replicas which Lucas would likely contend were illegal) is found here.  It utilizes cheap off the shelf components and the still-available Graflex part.

 

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Too Dangerous
By MozeeToby on 7/29/2010 12:14:04 PM , Rating: 4
I just can't even get behind this, you're selling a device that is in many ways more dangerous than a firearm and marketing it basically as a toy. It is only a matter of time until there's a news story about someone permanently blinded by one of these, I can only hope it isn't an innocent bystander or worse someone in a position where sudden loss of vision leads to deaths.

Market it as what it is, a hand held personal weapon that violates at least one of the Geneva conventions (before anyone asks the answer is "The Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons - Protocol 4: Blinding Laser Weapons"). Maybe then at least people will realize that what they are buying is a weapons grade device.




RE: Too Dangerous
By NullSubroutine on 7/29/10, Rating: 0
RE: Too Dangerous
By MozeeToby on 7/29/2010 1:19:01 PM , Rating: 4
You can blind someone instantly from 100 yards with a fork? That's impressive. Even with a standard laser pointer you need to hold it on someone's open eye for multiple seconds to do permanent damage, this thing will blind you permanently literally before you have a chance to blink.

It isn't the fact that they're selling it that I have a problem with, as I said before it is their marketing. People are going to buy this because they think it looks cool, never appreciating just how quickly you can ruin someone's life with it. People understand that guns are dangerous, they don't understand how dangerous a powerful laser is.


RE: Too Dangerous
By mcnabney on 7/29/2010 1:34:26 PM , Rating: 4
I agree with you, but your statement about the Geneva Conventions is misleading. Technically you can't use non-FMJ bullets in war either. Which means that all of those hollowpoint bullets you see at the sporting goods store are illegal if used in war. The Geneva Conventions prohibit the use of lasers to blind individuals not using optical enhancers, unless it occurs accidentally in attempts to optical and lightgathering equipment. Big loophole. I imagine the only way to run affoul of it is to design a device that can blind the unaided eye at a distance and to then use it directly on personel.


RE: Too Dangerous
By DanNeely on 7/29/2010 2:02:11 PM , Rating: 2
The letter of the law is even weirder than that. Shooting a laser into the eyes of a soldier to blind them is illegal. Shooting a laser into the eyes of a pilot during landing to cause him to crash and kill himself is completely within the GC's bounds.


RE: Too Dangerous
By MozeeToby on 7/29/2010 3:27:14 PM , Rating: 4
It makes sense if you look at what it is trying to prevent. Imagine you're in a major war and you have the enemy in your sights, you can A) Shoot and kill him or B) Permanently blind him.

If you shoot him he is removed permanently from combat. If you blind him he is still permanently removed from combat but now he is a drain on the enemy in every way possible. The enemy has to feed and clothe him, give him medical attention, watch him stumble around base until he can be sent home. Even at home he will be a drain on their economy for years to come.

Now imagine if instead of 1 soldier blinded there's a thousand or ten thousand. Binding or otherwise maiming an enemy soldier does more damage to the enemy than killing him does and the world doesn't want to see thousands of purposefully maimed soldiers every time a war breaks out.


RE: Too Dangerous
By dxf2891 on 8/3/2010 9:57:17 AM , Rating: 2
"...and the world doesn't want to see thousands of purposefully maimed soldiers every time a war breaks out."

Huh?!?!? You've obviously never been in, read about, seen a movie about or thought about war. (SMH at this idiotic statement)


RE: Too Dangerous
By Hyperion1400 on 7/29/2010 11:43:20 PM , Rating: 2
The Geneva Convention doesn't govern the use of munitions used in warfare. You are thinking of the Hague Accords.

http://www.thegunzone.com/hague.html

Pretty good article for a site called The Gun Zone; I must admit I expected a bit more crazy xD


RE: Too Dangerous
By NullSubroutine on 7/29/2010 1:49:42 PM , Rating: 1
Wow, you really thought someone was referring to a fork as a projectile weapon meant to blind? The 3 things referenced in my post (laser pointer, fork, match) are things more or equally dangerous as this "need to banned" laser "weapon".

A fork can kill someone either by stabbing into the heart, or hitting a main artery, but forks are not banned. Other laser pointers can blind (as can sling shots or rocks pinched by driving car tires). And matches are far more readily available and can burn or start fires just as deadly as a power laser "weapon".

Seeing the lethality and dangerousness of common every day items equal or exceed the laser pointer in this article, makes it ridiculous to seriously consider "banning" it.


RE: Too Dangerous
By MozeeToby on 7/29/2010 2:00:35 PM , Rating: 5
I never said, anywhere in any of my posts on this article, that this laser needs to be banned. Ever. So... yeah.

Secondly, how dangerous something is takes into account things like how easy it is to hurt someone, especially how easy it is to hurt someone accidentally. It is very hard to accidentally hurt someone with a fork. It is very had to accidentally hurt someone with a laser pointer. It is very hard to accidentally hurt someone with a match.

On the other hand, it is trivially easy to cause permanent blindness with a 1W laser. Sweeping it over a crowd will do it. Shining it off a reflective surface will do it. It will do it silently, and it will do it from a long range such that you might have a dozen close calls without ever knowing it. It has nearly zero laws about who can own it and where and when it can be operated and even if there were laws they would be utterly unenforceable.


RE: Too Dangerous
By abel2 on 7/29/2010 2:56:41 PM , Rating: 1
I gotta say this is probably the only logical post against the selling of this laser in both stories (forgot date of last post on this wicked laser).

Still though, wicked lasers sells many laser pointers that are dangerous. Some up to 500mW output power. They are usually packaged with tinted glasses for use and it is 'usually' assumed a safe and responsible person is going to be purchasing it.

Although I do not like their grand promotion of a product that can burn things on contact, I do not believe that this should necessitate the withdrawal of the product from the market.


RE: Too Dangerous
By NullSubroutine on 7/29/2010 2:57:46 PM , Rating: 3
I apologize for attributing others claims of this needing to be banned on grounds of it being too "dangerous" (something that has been said many times in other news articles relating to this device) to you, when you did not say it.

I would disagree that measuring stick for dangerousness (for a weapon)(possibly banning) is the degree in which it can have accidents. In which if it was the measuring stick, cars, matches, and tons of other things high a high propensity for accidents (not percentage or per captia but total number) and are not considered inherently dangerous.

Anything can be dangerous when used improperly or with carelessness.


RE: Too Dangerous
By rmclean816 on 7/30/10, Rating: 0
RE: Too Dangerous
By lyeoh on 8/1/2010 2:05:29 PM , Rating: 1
The large numbers of stupid and ignorant people (you can see examples around) are why this weapon should be regulated and controlled just like fully automatic firearms.

This weapon can keep causing damage as long as it's on. It has an effective range of more than 100 metres (from the specs it can cause problems at 200 metres, at that range I think it's about 200 milliseconds for damage). At those ranges the beam footprint becomes big enough to easily hit eyes.

It is not a one-shot weapon. Even an M16 runs out of bullets faster than this weapon will run out of juice.

Someone at a concert/cinema could easily blind dozens or hundreds, or wherever you have lots of people looking at the same area. Just a few sweeps is all you need.

Those who compare this weapon to a fork are stupid fools.


RE: Too Dangerous
By Reclaimer77 on 7/29/10, Rating: 0
RE: Too Dangerous
By MozeeToby on 7/29/2010 5:28:32 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I would like to see you take this thing and hit someones eye with it from 100 yards. I bet the average person couldn't even hit someone with a rifle from 100 yards, and you think something as small as an eyeball is at risk?


quote:
They don't!? What, may I ask, lead you to this conclusion? I think people have a pretty good idea at what a powerful laser is.


Obviously you don't realize how dangerous it is or you wouldn't blow off the danger of getting hit in the eye with it at 100 yards. You don't have to line it up and hold it on someone's eye to do damage. At 1W, sweeping it quickly across someones face will cause blindness, even if it only hits the eye for a hundredth of a second. For all intents and purposes the damage is done instantly. I'm not saying someone is going to go around doing this maliciously, I'm saying that accidents with this device are inevitable.


RE: Too Dangerous
By Reclaimer77 on 7/29/2010 5:43:32 PM , Rating: 3
Accident's with ANYTHING are inevitable.

Sorry but because something *might* happen isn't enough for me to go along with banning it.


RE: Too Dangerous
By MozeeToby on 7/29/2010 5:53:17 PM , Rating: 2
Who said it should be banned? All I ever said was that it is far too dangerous to be marketed as a toy. Personally, given it's level of danger I would like to see it regulated the same way firearms are (i.e. you have to pass a basic safety test, background check, and waiting period).

Yes, accidents are possible with anything. You could trip walking through your kitchen and put your eye out with a fork or burn your house down with a match. But just shining this on a white piece of paper could blind someone with the reflection, if you honestly don't see the difference between those scenarios I give up, because you'll never understand why a high powered laser is a dangerous thing.


RE: Too Dangerous
By Reclaimer77 on 7/29/2010 5:59:15 PM , Rating: 2
I didn't say it wasn't dangerous. I just don't agree that it's "too dangerous". And it's not being marketed as a toy.

quote:
Personally, given it's level of danger I would like to see it regulated the same way firearms are


Of course you would. No surprise there.


RE: Too Dangerous
By JediJeb on 7/31/2010 1:16:08 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
But just shining this on a white piece of paper could blind someone with the reflection, if you honestly don't see the difference between those scenarios I give up, because you'll never understand why a high powered laser is a dangerous thing.


I just have to comment on this one. First of all shining this on a white piece of paper would almost certainly scatter the beam enough to reduce its power below dangerous levels. Second if it is as powerful as it is stated, it would burn through the paper instead of reflecting off of it. Even a 1W laser is not dangerous if its beam is dispersed sufficiently. The difference in power of a 1W laser focused at a 0.1 inch diameter and one focused at a 1.0 inch diameter is about 100 times less power, because as the diameter increases the power per square inch decreases at a factor of D-squared, so at 10 times the diameter you have 100 times less power. This is why as it is now shipped with the safety lens in place most people are complaining it will not burn anything.


RE: Too Dangerous
By FaceMaster on 7/29/2010 6:00:19 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Accident's with ANYTHING are inevitable.


That's what I keep telling the jury, but they just won't listen...


RE: Too Dangerous
By NullSubroutine on 7/29/2010 6:02:30 PM , Rating: 2
And you are responsible for your actions, if you accidentally kill someone, depending on circumstances you will be guilty of committing manslaughter.


RE: Too Dangerous
By FaceMaster on 7/29/2010 9:26:09 PM , Rating: 3
I didn't hurt anybody. They just got scared. Everybody runs faster with a knife!


RE: Too Dangerous
By croc on 7/29/2010 11:26:34 PM , Rating: 2
So anyone in the states can just waltz up and buy a fully automatic weapon? after all, they're not dangerous until used, so why ban them?

Under IEC regs, this device is a class 4 (unlimited power) device. But whatever, AUS follows the IEC regs, so it is not for sale unless you have the appropriate licenses.


RE: Too Dangerous
By MrBlastman on 7/30/2010 9:41:21 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
So anyone in the states can just waltz up and buy a fully automatic weapon?


I wish we could but unfortunately we can not. No, in order to purchase full auto it has to have been made before 1986 and you have to pay for a tax stamp, which allows the government to search your home at any time to inspect your firearms.

Yes, it is sad considering the majority of gun crime is perpetuated with handguns, NOT assault rifles. It is also sad considering that the majority of gun crime could be prevented by allowing looser carry laws so the people can protect themselves from the criminals (who don't obey the laws).

This laser though, it is a mixed bag, in many ways it should be a restricted purchase--i.e. only sold to adults as a weapon.


RE: Too Dangerous
By lyeoh on 8/1/2010 2:28:53 PM , Rating: 2
"the people can protect themselves from the criminals"

Uh very often the only difference between "the people" and a criminal is one bad decision.

"considering the majority of gun crime is perpetuated with handguns, NOT assault rifles."

Obvious since assault rifles are harder to get.

So what next? Don't bother regulating nukes because it's a fact that millions more people have been killed in wars by machetes than nukes?

If the tech improves I guess you have no problems with letting anyone have a "Big Red Kill Everyone Else Button"...

Lots of silly people think guns will be useful to protect themselves against the Evil Governments. But if they already have a democracy, if they think the voters can't even make good decisions with their votes, why would they make good decisions with their bullets (who to fight for/against)?

And if your military is not far better armed than you, how's things in Africa?


RE: Too Dangerous
By JediJeb on 7/31/2010 1:19:38 PM , Rating: 2
Class 4 is available for purchase in the US, but the device must come with an interlock switch so it can not be activated by accident.(I believe this device has a key on it that must be used before the power button becomes active)


RE: Too Dangerous
By NullSubroutine on 7/29/10, Rating: 0
RE: Too Dangerous
By MozeeToby on 7/29/2010 6:17:31 PM , Rating: 4
To hit a target with a rifle you have to line up your shot, hold it steady, and pull the trigger at which point a single projectile travels downrange at a fast but not instantaneous speed. Along the way it is affected by the wind, by gravity, and by imperfections in the gun and bullet.

To hit a target with a laser I hold down the a button and see where the dot shows up and adjust from there. It travels instantaneously, without deflection from the any of the issues that a rifle suffers from. The beam is continuous and I only need to hit my target for a tiny fraction of a second to do damage. I have zero doubt I could put someone's eye out with this thing at 100 yards if I wanted to.

Yes, if I try really hard I can put my eye out with just about anything. The difference is, with this laser I have to try really hard not to put my eye out with it. Shining it at a white wall and looking at the dot it makes will blind you in a few seconds. Hitting something made of glass or crystal can cause blindness almost instantly. Getting hit with the beam itself isn't even the major concern.


RE: Too Dangerous
By Reclaimer77 on 7/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: Too Dangerous
By sinful on 7/29/2010 8:00:24 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You wouldn't see a "dot" with your bare eyes from 100 yards. End of discussion. And nobody has a steady enough hand to do what you describe.


You don't need a steady hand.

Sure, you couldn't shoot someone in the eyes with a rifle 100 yards away.
But what about with an M16 firing 25 rounds/second? Maybe?
What about a M61 Vulcan cannon firing 100 rounds/second? Maybe better odds, perhaps?

Okay, well then what about a laser effectively firing infinite rounds/second?

How accurate would you have to be then?

Oh, and as a bonus, this has infinite ammo and is completely silent, and your target may not even realize they're being "fired upon".

Oh but hey, what's the worst that could happen? It's not like highschool kids could buy this thing and shine it at kids in an auditorium or something. Nah!!!


RE: Too Dangerous
By Reclaimer77 on 7/29/10, Rating: -1
RE: Too Dangerous
By Etsp on 7/29/2010 9:08:39 PM , Rating: 2
You'll get my Red Rider BB gun from me when you pry it from my cold dead hands... or after I set it down and you sneak up on my from the left side... I kinda shot my eye out a while back...


RE: Too Dangerous
By cjohnson2136 on 7/30/2010 10:35:52 AM , Rating: 2
Thats wrong I have a green laser pointer I forget the power output but it is no where near the strength of this laser and I can see the dot 100 yards away.


RE: Too Dangerous
By AssBall on 7/29/2010 7:14:01 PM , Rating: 1
By your same logic people shouldn't drive, either, its too dangerous.


RE: Too Dangerous
By tng on 7/30/2010 9:31:20 AM , Rating: 2
I agree. We let people drive dangerous weapons on our streets all the time. It is time to stop the slaughter out there on the streets and highways....

Ban all vehicles now and 40,000 people will be saved in a year in the US alone. ;)


RE: Too Dangerous
By Fanon on 8/2/2010 11:41:58 AM , Rating: 2
No, not the same logic. Driving is regulated by each state, and the regulations make you go through an educational course, pass a test, and gain a license before you can legally drive a vehicle.

This device isn't regulated. It can be purchased and used without any type of registration, no safety course, nada.

Two completely different scenarios.


RE: Too Dangerous
By AssBall on 8/3/2010 3:37:32 PM , Rating: 2
O RLY? I disagree, and stand by my analogy.

Lasers are actively regulated.
http://www.lasercompliance.com/
http://www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/otm_iii/otm_iii_6...

So you are saying the NHTSA regs are better because they are more restrictive than OSHA's, or what?


RE: Too Dangerous
By callmeroy on 7/30/2010 8:32:33 AM , Rating: 2
This is "debate" is almost getting humorus to me now...

(but still mostly moronic..)

I KNEW someone would say "ooh well there's tons of objects in the house or driving is dangerous too lets ban that"...really guys...seriously that's how dumb you want to act?

Has it ever occurred to you that your own logic works the other way to?

If your point is to say everything has the potential to harm, driving can kill, you can kill folks with a fork, etc. (whatever is my point)...why not ban those too...

Then ok...let's use YOUR logic then and go "Well then why do we even require ANY regulation at all on firearms...hell let anyone go out and buy any damn weapon they want!...after all driving is dangerous and that kills...and we are allowed to drive!"


RE: Too Dangerous
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/2010 8:54:18 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah umm except "Gun Control" doesn't work. Can you cite me a single time where someone was determined to kill someone, and was thwarted because of it? Because I can cite you thousands of times where it failed. The vast, and I mean overwhelming majority, of gun crimes in this country are NOT from legally purchased firearms. Gun Control is also unconstitutional, but we've accepted it as a society because we like that warm fuzzy feeling that only government regulation can deliver.

Point is, the idea that without gun control we would have swarming masses of people going around shooting everyone mindlessly is, well, absurd. We live in a civilized society with laws and rules. We are not zombie apes. This isn't the dark ages.

I don't know why I even bother arguing these concepts on Daily Tech, home base of the teenage leftists. So you tell me, what is the middle ground. If the extreme arguments are to either ban everything, or allow everything, what is the middle ground? I ask you.

And this IS Daily Tech. You know, technology?? A handheld laser this powerful is an amazing achievement!! We should be talking about THAT, not how people are going to be blinded like it's already happened. I mean, honestly, what the hell? Let's just stifle innovation on a Tech website because there is a downside to it? That's a terrible attitude to have.


RE: Too Dangerous
By tng on 7/30/2010 9:41:22 AM , Rating: 2
Britain banned handguns what 10-12 years ago? They did it because of the murder rate with handguns.

Within the last year or two there was an online article that I was reading that they were considering banning knifes of certain types and lengths because they were now the No. 1 weapon used in murders.....

You can't just get rid of something and expect that the problem goes away. People who would normally use a gun to kill someone, in the absence of a gun will find something else. It is the people, not the object....

Gun control does not work as seen by the example of the UK.


RE: Too Dangerous
By Reclaimer77 on 7/29/2010 6:15:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You don't have to line it up and hold it on someone's eye to do damage. At 1W, sweeping it quickly across someones face will cause blindness, even if it only hits the eye for a hundredth of a second.


From 100 yards, there is no way you would be able to tell if you were hitting someone's face with this. Much less "sweep" it back and forth over the eye area.


RE: Too Dangerous
By stlrenegade on 7/30/2010 11:34:09 AM , Rating: 2
If it's anything like a red laser pointer, you could. I aimed a red laser pointer on my neighbor's house across the street (50-75 yds away) and I could see the dot on the house and aim it on certain spots.


RE: Too Dangerous
By Fanon on 8/2/2010 11:47:50 AM , Rating: 2
I tell you what. You stand 100 yards away, and I'll shoot a 1W laser at you. When/where shall we meet?


RE: Too Dangerous
By callmeroy on 7/30/2010 8:26:10 AM , Rating: 2
I think 'MozeeToby' is on the right track on this one guys...I think anyone in this entire thread is a bit out of touch with reality if they don't appreciate the damage this particular product is capable of.

I read all of his posts he didn't mention it should be banned or not sold so why do you all keep replying to his comments as if he did say that?

The "self defense" rights angle or "free market" defenses...is that why you are slamming him?

That's stupid...because saying a dangerous product (a dangerous product that can inflict harm at range no less) shouldn't have SOME KIND of regulation attached to it even as simple as "we need ID to make sure you are XX age , plus you are reguired to take this safety course"....those requirements are NOT tramping on your rights of free market enterprise or self defense or whatever other excuse you basing your outrage on.


RE: Too Dangerous
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/2010 9:00:26 AM , Rating: 2
Callmeroy, it's because he assumes we're all irresponsible idiots.

I, and others, never said we don't "appreciate the damage" this could do. My point is, ok, some idiots MIGHT go around trying to blind people. So what? Just because a tiny minority might miss use a product is no justification for limiting my access to it.

I mean, he keeps trying to hammer the same point home. Yes, we get it, this could blind you. So what?

But on a personal note, he has this really annoying nanny way of putting things. He could be a serial killer for all we know, but he's sitting here preaching about the dangers of this laser. It's really condescending too, because we're just supposed to assume that -based on a few internet posts- that he is in fact more responsible than us.


RE: Too Dangerous
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/2010 9:25:37 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
SOME KIND of regulation attached to it even as simple as "we need ID to make sure you are XX age , plus you are reguired to take this safety course"...


Where is that in his OP though? It's not there. All I see is some idiots hand-wringing, and a ridiculous point about the Geneva convention. Do you know how retarded he is for even bringing that up?

Last time I checked, the Geneva Convention dealt with how countries would behave themselves in times of war against each other and so forth. What in the hell does that have to do with this device?

But you think he's "on the right track", brilliant.


RE: Too Dangerous
By Rookierookie on 7/29/2010 8:24:16 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
People don't just go around all day looking for ways to hurt others

Most people don't. But we just needed one wacko out of tens of thousands to pull off a school shooting.


RE: Too Dangerous
By Reclaimer77 on 7/29/2010 8:31:11 PM , Rating: 2
And? Your point?


RE: Too Dangerous
By cenobite9 on 7/30/2010 9:22:57 AM , Rating: 2
Lasers, like guns, are only as dangerous as the person using them. If a non-laser safety informed individual buys a powerful laser and then starts pointing it at people then yes, a laser pointer is very dangerous. I own some pointers myself and have done some crazy experiments at home, in an enclosed environment with no one else around, with them but I never have deliberately pointed a laser at someone. And even at home I use protective goggles and I am very mindful of possible reflections. It's the ones who choose not to follow general laser safety guidelines that make these things so dangerous. High-powered pointers IMO should be treated like guns: they should not be left where a child could get to them, if you have children at home then keep them in a lock box, and if you must have a class 3B or higher laser try to find one with the proper safety interlocks and lens shutters.


RE: Too Dangerous
By karndog on 7/31/2010 11:44:57 AM , Rating: 1
You HAVE to be American..am i right?? And probably from the South.
You cling to your moronic constitutional "right to bear arms" like it was your retarded child trying to cross a busy street. You do realise that that idiotic law causes more deaths and crime than it prevents right? Just this week a 4 year old boy in America killed a 3 year old girl with a handgun he found lying around his home. But i suppose that was the little boys fault for not understanding the potential danger of his parents rights to protect themselves from intruders right?
What are you people so afraid of anyway? Ze Germans?


RE: Too Dangerous
By Fanon on 8/2/2010 11:51:43 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Just this week a 4 year old boy in America killed a 3 year old girl with a handgun he found lying around his home.


Why was the handgun found lying around his home? What idiot left it out for a four year old to find?


RE: Too Dangerous
By Enoch2001 on 7/31/2010 6:28:24 PM , Rating: 2
+ 10 for your sovereign soapbox speech, though I also feel this product could easily be abused in the hands of an irresponsible or malicious person.

Doesn't make me want one any less though... ;-)


RE: Too Dangerous
By Amiga500 on 7/30/2010 3:38:09 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
you're selling a device that is in many ways more dangerous than a firearm


Don't be too proud of this technological terror you've constructed.

The ability to blind people is insignificant compared to the power of a bullet.


RE: Too Dangerous
By tng on 7/30/2010 9:45:16 AM , Rating: 2
Love it....


RE: Too Dangerous
By callmeroy on 7/30/2010 8:13:55 AM , Rating: 2
i agree wholeheartedly with you.

this just astounds me how this gadget is seemingly so easy (like you said..its just like getting a "toy") to acquire and the harm...permament harm mind you, one can inflict on another with it...its actually pretty scary thought to me.

I'm paranoid about my eyesight already (eye disease in both eyes, which was discovered in my late teens)....now to think some "kid" that gets this thinking "wow neato a light saber"...then one day during a fight with someone the hormones start kicking, blood starts boiling -- we all know how much self control teenagers have (although some adults are pretty bad too) and BAM! The kid burns someone or worse points the thing at someones eyes.

You burn someone's retina / cornea....that's an injury that your parent's punishment and saying "sorry" won't make "ok".


RE: Too Dangerous
By Reclaimer77 on 7/30/2010 9:05:52 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
.now to think some "kid" that gets this thinking "wow neato a light saber"...then one day during a fight with someone the hormones start kicking, blood starts boiling -- we all know how much self control teenagers have (although some adults are pretty bad too) and BAM! The kid burns someone or worse points the thing at someones eyes.


You really go around thinking about that? Really?

If I thought like you, I wouldn't be able to leave my house! There is shit that's out there that could kill or maim you in a heartbeat is just too scary to think about. And there is nothing you can do, most times, to avoid it.

I think you need help man, and I don't mean that as a insult. But if you need to create illusions of teenagers (how would they get this again) going around blinding and burning people...well.. that's just kind of sick. No offense, but you need to find your center, man.


RE: Too Dangerous
By jamesjwb on 7/30/2010 8:55:55 AM , Rating: 2
I really don't understand why anyone would want to buy this utterly pointless gadget. Plus, as you rightly state, it's far more dangerous than this company seems willing to market and therefore makes it even more anger-inducing.

But really, I just wouldn't buy it, and if I saw anyone in the street messing around with one, I'd honestly be urged to rip it from there hands and smash it.


RE: Too Dangerous
By LRonaldHubbs on 7/31/2010 5:59:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I really don't understand why anyone would want to buy this utterly pointless gadget.

Because it's awesome, simple is that. Don't look for a complicated reason when the answer is so very simple.

quote:
Plus, as you rightly state, it's far more dangerous than this company seems willing to market and therefore makes it even more anger-inducing.

Then you obviously didn't read any of the information about it on the company's website. The product page is plastered with warnings and links to informative videos about the dangers of shining lasers at people or planes. When you buy the thing there is a checklist of about 10 different warnings that you have to acknowledge that you read before you can actually buy it. They are very clearly marketing it as a dangerous item and not a toy. You're also ignoring the fact that shipments were delayed because they built a second revision of the device with a passcode lock, a lower default output power, a pulsed output mode to further reduce power, and a training lens which again reduces the power. With these safety features it is no more powerful than their 200mW Bluray laser which has been on the market for some time. What the hell more do you want from them, short of stopping sales altogether?

quote:
But really, I just wouldn't buy it, and if I saw anyone in the street messing around with one, I'd honestly be urged to rip it from there hands and smash it.

I don't condone destruction of personal property, but I do agree that this device should not be used 'in the street.' In fact, it shouldn't be used anywhere that bystanders might catch a glimpse. Anyone who buys this needs a controlled, isolated environment in which to use it, or needs to just not use it.


Laser Pointer Forums...?
By Suntan on 7/29/2010 1:24:53 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
noted by commenters on various laser pointer forums


Seriously? Alright, anyone got a link to a laser pointer forum? I just have to see what some of the conversations look like in a forum like that.

-Suntan




RE: Laser Pointer Forums...?
By Shooks on 7/29/2010 1:54:20 PM , Rating: 2
RE: Laser Pointer Forums...?
By sviola on 7/29/2010 2:17:29 PM , Rating: 2
I canceled my order
By Breathless on 7/29/2010 12:09:47 PM , Rating: 2
I placed my order "with the quickness" as soon as I saw this originally reported on DT. 2 weeks after the original order, it still hadn't shipped yet, and I received an email saying that it wouldn't be shipped for two more weeks and that the revisions had to be made before it would ship. I got fed up and canceled my order. I thought it was a fat chance that I would receive a full refund because they weren't responding to emails, but sure enough about 2 days after I requested the refund the money was already credited back to my credit card. I have to at least give them props for not trying to stiff me or force me to do a chargeback, but i'm glad I canceled my $200+ order. Theres only so many plastic bags I can burn with a laser before I realize that my money could have been spent on more useful things...




RE: I canceled my order
By theapparition on 7/29/2010 1:22:47 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I placed my order "with the quickness" as soon as I saw this originally reported on DT .

There's you problem. While I enjoy DT for it's comments section and to get an alternative perspective on news, rarely are they breaking "new" news. In this case, Wicked Lasers were selling that item for a while before being reported.

Some articles post up days later after such bad tech websites such as CNN or MSNBC pick them up. Or even weeks after in some instances.

This isn't a criticism, just that I don't rely on DT as a news feed. Put it this way, if the world were to end, you'd have died long before reading about it here.


By mrinternet on 8/2/2010 11:36:42 AM , Rating: 2
I have to say on being happy with the quality and not with the customer service of the laser (the actually point of this now watered down story), ...but I do not see how this laser can be used as a weapon... Just to offer my penny worth, keep in mind you can buy laser pointers at the office supply store, or DIY warehouse that sell lasers for tape measures and leveling. . This laser meets several US saftey requirements, and has multiple safety features built in, safety pins, plates that cna be removed or even the battery. If a guy walks into a bar and someone pulls out a hammer, someone a knife and someone a laser pointer, which one are you going to be more afraid of, not the laser I promise you, none of those are banned. My laser (and I) are registered with the police, I have no concerns about that. As a kid in UK I had a bb gun and it was registered with the police, growing up in the USA you did not and still do not need a permit to carry a gun in many states, at some point there needs to be some common sense used. I also purchased an optics kit with prisms and lenses. I am more likely to cut myself than I am to blind myself with a laser. Perhaps we should ban glass as well. Lightsabers don't kill people, Jedi kill people.. oops neither are real folks.




By carigis on 8/5/2010 4:02:36 PM , Rating: 2
interesting.. you do know the laser pointers sold in stores are a much lower power right? You are not buying a laser that can burn things at office depot. I could defiantly see how a powerful laser could be a dangerous weapon.

That said, If these were so dangerous why am I not reading

"another moron blinds himself with toy lightsaber in the news every day.. or two more cats mysteriously blinded or flight 666 crashes after pilot blinded by lightsaber..."

Has anyone bought these things? or have they delivered more then 1? Im sure more then one star wars fan qualifies for a darwin award and has aimed it at there white wall or mirror to see how cool the dot looks and how well it reflects..

and in the US there is only like 2 states that you don't need a permit to carry a gun in


Come on, Dude
By Sahrin on 7/29/2010 3:07:50 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
as he avoided using the term "lightsaber" in the prequel trilogy he recently released.


"It is obvious that this contest cannot be decided by our knowledge of the Force...but by our skills with a lightsaber."

I know I'm making myself out to be a massive dork here, but this is Star Wars, not Revenge of the Bodysnatchers.




What about the shark?
By ph2010 on 7/29/2010 2:24:17 PM , Rating: 2
So all I want know is...does this thing have an option to attach it to a sharks head or what?




yawn
By bryanW1995 on 7/29/2010 3:14:40 PM , Rating: 2
wake me up when I can have a real lightsaber duel with my arch nemesis.




By Antikapitalista on 8/1/2010 6:59:02 AM , Rating: 2
Maybe he should white a letter to his psychiatrist about palliative treatment of senile dementia.

Next, he should write a letter to a law teacher with very good pedagogical skills to have him explain the basics of copyright and patent law to him.

To the best of my knowledge, "Light Saber" is not the same as "lightsaber";
next, "lightsaber" is not patented (although I would really love to read the patent – in fact, it would be such a patent nonsense, that even the crapitalist U.S. patent system would throw it out);
that legal analphabet claims that lightsaber is "copyrighted", so fine, Wicked Lasers can produce a look-alike product and Lucaswhatever can produce theirs.

Likewise:
"Lucas liberally "borrowed" the design of the original lightsaber himself from the Graflex camera."

Oh, really?! Is it just I, who cannot see any similarity between the camera and a lightsaber, or that I simply have not yet taken a sufficient dose of hallucinogens?

That must be by far the most farfetched argument of "similarity" that I have read in my entire life...




"We are going to continue to work with them to make sure they understand the reality of the Internet.  A lot of these people don't have Ph.Ds, and they don't have a degree in computer science." -- RIM co-CEO Michael Lazaridis











botimage
Copyright 2012 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki