Recent comments in /f/gadgets

Kionera t1_jadlg9v wrote

If anything an under-display camera would be even better for privacy, since the pixels in front of the camera would need to be turned off for there to be any sort of image quality, so having the display on acts as a privacy shield for the camera.

So what if the display is off you say? Then you can still spot the lens easily as if it’s just a regular camera. Just cover it up when you’re done using the display and it’s pretty much permanently blocked.

11

captainmcfuckface t1_jadi80u wrote

ok, but still…

Japan almost never worries about cancer screening without a symptom and they have a longer life expectancy.

Personally, I think all the fear mongering over cancer is worse for us as a whole.

−11

DataDrivenOrgasm t1_jadgwdy wrote

The cancer cell needs to be circulating and viable for this assay to work. They isolate individual cells from the blood and culture them to determine if any are cancerous. This is not a sensitive assay; far from it. They can shift through a little over 10,000 cells per assay. But blood has over 10 billion blood cells per ml. The cancer cells would need to be at level greater than 1 million per ml to be detected reliably.

10

VAMPHYR3 t1_jaddo8z wrote

Yea lock button fingerprint sensors are the best imo. As cool as under display fingerprint sensors are, they are not worth the effort.

The lock button fingerprint sensor of my S10e was lightning fast and conventiently placed. I loved it.

Same as fingerprint sensors on the back of the phone. Had a few friends that had those. Also really good.

The ones under the display so far were not really great...

2

captainmcfuckface t1_jad75fo wrote

I was thinking the opposite. that trace amounts of cancer are always happening in the body and being told to kill themselves by the immune system.

And if a device is sensitive enough to detect cancer in these ways, we suddenly end up with a 100% cancer rate and a lot of needless stress.

Ironically making real cancer rates higher

29