Do you wear glasses? Check this out...

Hypnotoad · Post by **Hypnotoad** » 2004-02-25 01:24am

A genius MIT student invented a new way to manufacture glasses. He estimates the process will reduce the cost of eye wear to about $5 to $10 dollars. It should be ready in about two years.

"Griffith's advances in low-cost lenses sprung from his interests in rapid prototyping technologies and efficient manufacturing. Using a process dubbed programmable molding, he created a portable device similar to a desktop printer that can produce any prescription lens from a single-mold surface in five to 10 minutes... "

..."Griffith has created a prototype device to test the human eye. Patients need only wear the device, which looks like an oversized pair of goggles, and look at the world around them. An electronic sensor superimposed on the goggles monitors the lens in the wearer's eye and adjusts the device's lens to cancel the refractive errors, thus determining the correct prescription. "

He plans on helping poor countries with his invention.

Full Story

An interview with him was on the Canadian science show Daily Planet. You can see it at exn.ca in a few days.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2004-02-25 01:52am

100 to 5 or 10......WOW.

Vertigo1 · Post by **Vertigo1** » 2004-02-25 02:06am

That is pretty cheap. Then again, so are contact lenses.

$125 for a years supply, with changing lenses every two weeks (though they can last alot longer than that if properly cleaned).

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2004-02-25 02:11am

While Vertigo may like poking his eyes

, I'll take the cheaper glasses.

Still for me a pair lasts a decent time and so far this is the newest pair of frames I've bought in nearly a decade......much better looking as well.

Mayabird · Post by **Mayabird** » 2004-02-25 02:11am

I read about the guy before. He plans on sending cheap glasses to third world countries for literacy campaigns. The thought is that many people who have trouble reading have eye problems and can't see well, but because they have no idea that their eyes are bad they just get frustrated and never learn to read. Very cool.

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2004-02-25 02:32am

The money is in the frames anyway. Or atleast will be.

Vertigo1 · Post by **Vertigo1** » 2004-02-25 02:36am

Ghost Rider wrote:While Vertigo may like poking his eyes , I'll take the cheaper glasses.

Actually, I never could stand putting anything in my eyes for a while. Took me a few days to get used to it.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2004-02-25 02:50am

Vertigo1 wrote:
Ghost Rider wrote:While Vertigo may like poking his eyes , I'll take the cheaper glasses.
Actually, I never could stand putting anything in my eyes for a while. Took me a few days to get used to it.

I understand...hell I have many friend with more aversion then I do.

The problem I have with contacts is how I leave the house some days....ultra rushed and I could see myself fiddling with the damn thing on the metro to work...one bad jolt and well my finger in jammed into my eye...or losing a contact.

So glasses works better for me

.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2004-02-25 04:50am

kojikun wrote:The money is in the frames anyway. Or atleast will be.

The glasses are normally a much bigger cost factor than the frame. Unless, of course, you take the ultra-expensive designer frame...

I normally pay 2/3 of the price just for the glasses. The frame is a non-issue.

Rye · Post by **Rye** » 2004-02-25 07:33am

Yay! This sounds most excellent. I don't trust contact lenses, as they scratch your lens surface and little germs can get in...and we don't know the long term ramifications for laser treatment yet. All in all, this is cool. =)

2000AD · Post by **2000AD** » 2004-02-25 07:41am

I may only need glasses for long distance reading and driving but i still think this is a good thing.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2004-02-25 10:18am

I am nearly blind without my glasses, so this is very cool!

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2004-02-25 11:02am

This doesn't affect me and my perfect vision at all. I obviously haven't been touching myself at night enough.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2004-02-25 11:50am

SyntaxVorlon wrote:This doesn't affect me and my perfect vision at all. I obviously haven't been touching myself at night enough.

Neither have I... I touch myself in the morning

Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi · Post by **Asst. Asst. Lt. Cmdr. Smi** » 2004-02-25 11:55am

So Elton John can buy even more pairs of glasses now?

Solauren · Post by **Solauren** » 2004-02-25 12:16pm

I have full medical coverage at work (including visual and dental)

but still, this is a good thing

General Zod · Post by **General Zod** » 2004-02-25 12:18pm

hopefully this become a commonly available product soon. it sounds like it could be promising to those on low incomes who need glasses, considering most places already offer frames for free.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2004-02-25 12:19pm

So... when do you think Lenscrafters will have him whacked?

Zoink · Post by **Zoink** » 2004-02-25 12:27pm

*walks in*

This won't make Oakleys any cheaper

*walks out*

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-02-25 12:34pm

I take it this is the same tech used in aerspace now to make special parts like 3-D printing. You also see it used in Face/Off. Thought this would be already in use given how cheap it is to do.

KrauserKrauser · Post by **KrauserKrauser** » 2004-02-25 01:18pm

If my history with sight is any indication on old wives tales, I clean the pipes fairly regularly (read 1-2 per day) and have not had any decrease in my 20-20 vision.

aerius · Post by **aerius** » 2004-02-25 01:21pm

Zoink wrote:This won't make Oakleys any cheaper

Since I worked for an Oakley dealer, I can tell you the markup on them is higher than the industry average. Afterall, they do have to pay for their massive advertising and sponsorship budgets somehow...

However, it may make prescription Oakleys a few bucks cheaper...hopefully....

Crayz9000 · Post by **Crayz9000** » 2004-02-25 01:55pm

Well, I haven't worn glasses since about 1998, and I'm glad I don't anymore. Funnily enough, my eyes returned to 20/20 after I stopped wearing them...

beyond hope · Post by **beyond hope** » 2004-02-25 01:59pm

Since I can't wear contacts, this is excellent news.

Zoink · Post by **Zoink** » 2004-02-25 02:20pm

aerius wrote: Afterall, they do have to pay for their massive advertising and sponsorship budgets somehow...

Ya, I pay for that with my 5 pairs.

I have a tendancy to go overboard on certain things, with the 'Lance Armstrong' Gyro and matching glasses and such.