this post was submitted on 02 Aug 2026
461 points (99.6% liked)

Technology

86814 readers
3752 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 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Zak@lemmy.world 11 points 17 hours ago (4 children)

Sure would be a shame if someone pointed lasers into them.

[–] Malyca@lemmy.zip 8 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

You'd need a laser powerful enough and those are hard to get. Those are super dangerous I'd recommend people stay away from them if they don't know about how they work.

[–] Zak@lemmy.world 10 points 16 hours ago

Absolutely. 500mW+ lasers can injure human eyes in a fraction of a second, even from a reflection, similar to how they can destroy a camera sensor.

They're not particularly hard to get online in the USA though.

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 7 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

Spray paint poles are cheaper and safer. Tungsten carbide sawzall blades aren’t that expensive either

[–] GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 3 points 13 hours ago* (last edited 13 hours ago) (1 children)

just use a circular saw with a medium tooth count blade designed for metal.

a six inch circular blade can cut up to 300 times more than a reciprocal saw blade when you compare tooth to tooth.

[–] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

They also cut faster, though are loud as hell.

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 hours ago

Thanks to signal trace, they don’t need functioning cameras so…good news everyone!

[–] T156@lemmy.world 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

That's a bad idea. You don't want to get a stranger, or yourself in the eye.

Anything that would do meaningful damage to a camera sensor will easily do that to human eyeballs if it refracts or gets reflected.

Especially for cheaper high-power lasers, which may not properly filter out invisible wavelengths like IR.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (1 children)

Anything that would do meaningful damage to a camera sensor will easily to that to human eyeballs if it refracts or gets reflected.

I don't think that's true? The lidars on Waymo have been known to damage camera sensors but are safe to the eyes. By damage, like a pixel or two go out, but that's from a random hit. If you did it right you could do more damage.

[–] T156@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago) (1 children)

Interesting. I would have expected cameras to be more resilient between both their internal filters and the sensor material being tougher than human eyeballs, so anything that could overwhelm that and burn out a camera sensor would be able to ruin someone's vision almost instantly.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 2 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

This says its about the specific wave lengths and our eyes are okay with the ones bad for cameras

https://www.faceofit.com/lidar-camera-sensor-damage/

If I hadn't heard of this happening before though I wouldn't have guessed this to be the case.