Talk:EyeTap

This doesn't exist
I'm pretty sure this doesn't exist. It purports to do most of what google glass did in 2001. The only references I can find to a "functioning" prototype are here. Which is pretty dissimilar from their claims. This might not be an outright scam, but they are definitely stretching the truth. Can someone who knows how wikipedia works flag this as misinforming? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 142.177.62.28 (talk) 22:59, 31 October 2017 (UTC)

Content for merging
content (by anon) moved from EyeTap article:

An "EyeTap" is a device that causes the eye to, in effect, function as if it were both a camera and a display, by intercepting at least some of the rays of light that would otherwise enter the eye, and diverting those rays of light through computational processing, prior to re-synthesis of the light. EyeTap devices allow for computer-mediated reality, as well as for continuous passive capture, recording, retrieval, and sharing of personal experiences. Such devices function as electric seeing aids (in the same way as a hearing aid, but for vision instead of hearing), and visual maps can be downloaded and changed in real time. The EyeTap was invented in Canada, and the concept has been developed over the past 30 years, toward sleek and slender electric eyeglasses that can improve vision, filter out advertising (block billboards), as well as mediate (augment or diminish) visual input. Diminished reality is useful for the visually impaired because visual input can be simplified so as not to overwhelm the wearer. Additionally, a CyborgLog (data captured from an EyeTap such as for lifelong cyborglog) can be used as a Personal Safety Device (PSD), also known as a "walk recorder" (analogous to the "black box" flight recorders in airplanes).

VfD Archived debate
Article EyeTap listed on Votes for deletion Apr 22 to Apr 29 2004, consensus was to keep. Discussion:

A term that is used to descrbe what appears to be a head mounted display. Not used by anyone else I know.
 * Keep. 40,500 google hits from a variety of organizations and even multiple languages. They all seem to refer back to Mann's basic concept and/or device (which appears to be a very specific type of head-mounted display). Rossami 21:40, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * I hate to come across as so vindictive, but my respectful contention is that it is not a specfic type of HMD. By the article definition, a movie studio which digitally alters film for special effects and shows them, video cameras and nightvision goggles are "EyeTaps", never really talked about as such, and not invented by Steven Mann, as the article states. Perhaps a more fair definition would be a HMD-computer setup that has been worn by Steven Mann.Maneesh


 * Keep. Perhaps it can redirect to Mann's page if it doesn't warrant an article of its own.  moink 23:33, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: idiosyncratic name given to a common device (head mounted display) for the purpose of identification with Steve Mann, and therefore self promotion. I wouldn't bother redirecting to Steve Mann; just delete it outright. Wile E. Heresiarch 02:40, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Repurpose. This page might more neutrally (and instructively) be about eyetap.org, and might include as a secondary definition 'any of the HMDs developed there [by members of that lab]'... on the other hand I think mann was calling his devices eyetaps long before the org was set up, while he was still at MIT. +sj+ 08:57, 2004 Apr 24 (UTC)


 * Keep. The article needs to be improved with regards to a clear definition of eyetap, but the eyetap device is a well known concept upon which there are several books, and undergradate as well as graduate courses.  An eyetap device takes light that's entering the eye and regenerates the light by computer.  Natural light from the scene is usually re-synthesized in laser light, so the eyetap eyeglasses function as a seeing aid.  Many such devices are now in use. Glogger. 12:04, 2004 Apr 24 (UTC)
 * For the record, this user has made less than 20 edits to the wiki. --Hemanshu 20:23, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * User:Glogger claims to be Steve Mann himself, and I don't see any reason to doubt him; all edits are Steve Mann related. See also my comments at . Wile E. Heresiarch 22:12, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is more than a head mounted display, though it could be part of it. It includes the actual technique for projecting data onto the retina and has potential medical uses for the visually impaired, which is my personal interest in this topic (to make my personal bias clear). If the page needs more diverse names attached to it, I can think of a number who might have differing things to say about eyetap. jasonnolan
 * For the record, this is User:Jasonnolan's 4th edit on the wiki. --Hemanshu 20:23, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Cribcage 01:16, 27 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Question
"Picture of C. Aimone with an injection moulded eyetap " Is the Eyetap actually stink IN TO the eye? or the wearer can take easily it off at anytime? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cyprus2k1 (talk • contribs) 18 September 2004 (UTC)


 * No, the eyetap is worn somewhat like glasses. The only thing entering the user's eye is light from the eyetap. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.80.211.11 (talk) 20:14, 21 August 2006‎ (UTC)

EyeTap diverter
Eyetap devices effectively locate both a camera and display in the eye, by way of diverting light that would otherwise enter the eye, and then re-synthezing it. So in answer to your question, the device is only optically in the eye, not directly attached into the eye. When you look at someone wearing an eyetap, you see the illusion as if the system was inside their eye, simply because of how the optical arrangement works. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Glogger (talk • contribs) 03:53, 23 October 2004 (UTC)

Unintelligible
As a casual reader, I couldn't understand most of this article, even though it is about something that struck me as interesting. I tend to think most people wouldn't quite get it, so maybe some modifications in favor of "layman's terms" might help. Cheers Paul 04:02, 29 April 2005 (UTC)

Under develpment or real?
It is not at all clear from this article, or from the EyeTap website, as to whether this is a functioning, marketed device, or is a product under development. Is the photo of a mock-up or a working device? This article really needs a careful edit. -Willmcw 00:44, August 16, 2005 (UTC)

well... from what i've gathered, it's both functioning, marketed.. and under development for the masses. i'm slightly worried about the masses using them, but i'd be the first on my block to use 'em :D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.161.42.222 (talk) 10:12, 30 April 2006‎ (UTC)

- um.. where can i find/make/get/sell/whatever information you can give me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.128.2.124 (talk • contribs)

EOG not EEG
EEG should be substituted for EOG. Although I have never come in contact with an eyetap device I am quite certain that the use of an eyetap device does not include fitting electrodes (about 20 electrodes is common in some research) to the skull. However, I do not doubt that one or two EOG-lectrodes are fitted into an eyetap device.

Please replace "EEG" - ElectroEncephaloGraphy with "EOG" - ElectroOculoGraphy in the article.

Wiki entries: Electroencephalography Electrooculography 11:35, 19 July 2006‎ (UTC)

Reads like an advertisment.
I googled "EyeTap" and it appears to be a private thing, as evidenced by the capital letters in the article itself, etc. - does anybody else see it? This barely only mentions the company, and refers to the name of the thing as something almost commonplace. I don't even know if this deserves its own page. Verisimilarity (talk) 22:28, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Image caption
C. Aimone with a one-eyed injection-molded EyeTap... And who the f**k is C. Aimone exactly? Don't you think, that if it is somebody important that this person should be referenced in the article text, otherwise it should be "A person with a one-eyed injection-molded EyeTap"? -- White rotten rabbit (talk) 16:13, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The caption was changed, thanks Septegram -- White rotten rabbit (talk) 15:05, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Wrong aspect ratio
The aspect ratio of the picture showing inventor Steve Mann is wrong. Could somebody please correct it? I would do it myself, except I don't know how to do it. -- White rotten rabbit (talk) 09:58, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Aspect ratio changed, thanks Obankston -- White rotten rabbit (talk) 09:00, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Attachment
Is it attached screwed into the bone of the skull? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.96.38.41 (talk) 17:48, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * AFAIK, you wear it like a pair of glasses. - M0rphzone (talk) 04:12, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

This article seems like an out dated love letter to Steve Mann
I mean I'm not a deletionist, but we have shorter articles on much more meaningful topics. M4bwav (talk) 21:20, 21 March 2023 (UTC)