This is safety-critical software: one mistake will blind a person.
> "Importantly, the device additionally uses millimeter-wave radar to scan its field of view for larger objects such as people and pets. If any of these are detected, its mosquito-zapping laser will not fire."
I note the startup doesn't actually disclose the laser output power anywhere, or what regulatory class that power level falls in. It's federal law[0] that commercially-sold lasers are labelled with this information.
They do in a YouTube video on their channel [0]. It’s 40 (!) watts. They also show it shooting indiscriminately at any small object, with an example where they feed it foam chips.
40W is scary strong for a laser. Almost like a nuke compared to a firecracker[0]:
> 5 milliwatts is wimpy. We can do better.
A 1-watt laser is an extremely dangerous thing. It’s not just powerful enough to blind you—it’s capable of burning skin and setting things on fire. Obviously, they’re not legal for consumer purchase in the US.
I imagine it's not a continuous output laser, hunting mosquitoes with one would be insane.
perihelions · 5h ago
That's more than enough to permanently blind someone with a partial reflection, i.e. you point this at an insect and there's a small polished-metal object somewhere behind it.
metalman · 4h ago
In parts of the world bieng able to eliminate mosquitos(other more deadly bugs) will outweigh a great deal of risk assosiated with lasers.
and there are things that can be done.
heat and motion detectors that disarm the system if people/pets are present
fields of fire that are above 99.999 % of peoples eyes
fields of fire very close to walls, where mosquitos alight, but it is almost impossible to get in the way for humans
multiple laser turrets that indivualy dont have the power to hurt a human badly, but can zap a bug
through co ordinated action.....perhaps set up outdoors with artificial breath and infra red bait traps to bring the mosquitos above a crowd.
more robust systems to be used in agricultural contexts.
this will be about comfort and protecting vulnerable populations, mosquitos/other bugs wont be going anywhere, chemical control has proven to cause ecological probelms worse than the bugs, and the attempts at useing biological methods is only a partial solution.
alextousss · 4h ago
I’m not here to sell my own startup, but there are other ways to kill mosquitoes than a 40 watts laser that could make someone blind from a secondary reflection (out of the mmWave radar detection range)
metalman · 2h ago
I think that by "secondary reflection" you are perhaps refering to a direct single reflection, rather than a double bank?
But in any case it is very very unlikely that there will anything availible outside of a high caliber optics lab that can reflect cohearant laser beams in such a way as to retain a dangerous power level.
The 40 watt laser is needed in order to provide a kill shot in in a small target in millisecond pulse, that only has to penetrate a fraction of a millimeter, and would be unlikely to penetrate a full cm into a human eye and do permanent damage even with a direct hit, not that anyone is going to advocate for useing lasers for eye surgery....oh wait
alextousss · 1h ago
I may haven't fully understood your answer, but a typical household mirror could reflect 90% of the laser power in a single coherent direction. Any sufficiently polished metal tool would have dangerous specular direction. I'm not sure of the math for a diffuse reflection, but the laser classification is here for a reason.
A human eye being transparent up to the fragile retina, yes, a laser would penetrate the eye and be concentrated in an extremely small spot on the retina. That's exactly the reason why we have safety around lasers, and why everything above 5mw is strictly for enclosed use. 40 watts shot at random in the void is definitely dangerous by all measures.
JumpCrisscross · 8h ago
“the device additionally uses millimeter-wave radar to scan its field of view for larger objects such as people and pets. If any of these are detected, its mosquito-zapping laser will not fire”
I’d want to see some third-party testing around eye safety before putting this in my home.
c22 · 56m ago
If there are no people around I wonder what is the utility of killing the mosquitos?
trhway · 7h ago
There is no eye safety - if it burns mosquito then it burns your retina.
And if you aren't moving, lets say sleeping, would the device decide it is ok to fire?
Instead of laser, they should have made a mechanical hand with fly zapper, fragile/soft enough to not injure people and pets, yet strong enough to kill mosquito. Or even like in that movie where kung-fu master catches a fly using chopsticks :)
littlestymaar · 6h ago
> And if you aren't moving, lets say sleeping,
This isn't the best example, how is it supposed to hit your retina if your eyes are closed?
tim333 · 38m ago
I think these things are a bit wasted on mosquitos which can be done in quite well by a plug in mozzie killer with insecticide in. Now bed bugs could be a worthier foe.
psadri · 5h ago
What I really want is an iOS app that helps me locate insects in a room. Start video feed, analyze pixels for a small object flying around and draw a green box around each while flying and a red box once it lands somewhere. I can take care of the rest.
dogman1050 · 3h ago
My dogs do this for me, minus the green box bit. They hear bugs, locate them, and focus on them until I do the rest, then they try to eat the remains.
tetris11 · 4h ago
wont your eyes be infinitely better than a phone camera for this?
esseph · 3h ago
Maybe yours are today, but maybe they won't be, tomorrow.
This product brings back fond memories to one of those early-internet gems: the "Star Wars mosquito defence system" gag infomercial that was launched 18 years (!) ago: https://youtu.be/wSIWpFPkYrk
OptionOfT · 5m ago
I remember watching this when it came out, in Dutch. Weird to be at an age where you remember stuff from 18 years ago.
jeswin · 7h ago
Maybe it doesn't hurt eyes, but I guess wide adoption of this tech would lay a minefield for mirrorless camera sensors.
emsign · 8h ago
This needs to be sized up and made to defend against kamikaze drones. Soon, very soon, everybody will want this to feel safe.
Yes, absolutely. But that precursor was actually a scaled up version of a device made to target birds.
goopypoop · 7h ago
Yeah but they were enormous birds
zarflax · 2h ago
And if InGen had actually developed the devices beyond prototypes the '90s might've turned out very differently.
LightBug1 · 5h ago
What will be the mosquito evolutionary response/outcome to this innovation?!
rcarmo · 5h ago
Mirrors.
samus · 1h ago
Here we go again; ideas like these seem to crop up every summer. Here's the problem all of them have in common: a laser powerful enough to kill a mosquito is also strong enough to blind people or to set things on fire if it misses.
"The concept of a laser-based mosquito defence system took off back in 2007, when astrophysicist Lowell Wood (one of the architects of the USA's famous Reagan-era "Star Wars" missile defence initiative) raised the idea of a smaller, mosquito-targeting laser system at a Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation brainstorming session on eliminating malaria.
Over the following years, prototypes were built, using freely available parts from cell phones and laser printers. A device was patented and demonstrated by a company called Intellectual Ventures, which was more interested in owning the patent than making a product. "
NitpickLawyer · 7h ago
> which was more interested in owning the patent than making a product.
I really hope that after copyright protections (insanely long, IMO) get revamped in the LLM aftermath, we start focusing on patent law. Patents were always in my mind a way to protect small_inventor from big_bad_corp, and give them a breathing room to get a product to market. We should really focus on this, and make patents moot as long as a) a working prototype is not demonstrated, b) the patent holder doesn't pursue the tech, c) a small domain-specific timeframe (less for medicine for example) and d) it's really really generic (i.e. a method to have LLM agents work in a loop - no, bobby, everyone can do that.)
ur-whale · 5h ago
I've been waiting for something like this for ages.
The fact it doesn't do houseflies is a huge downer though.
palata · 7h ago
Yay, more ways to kill insects! /s
NitpickLawyer · 7h ago
In the original prototype that was covered some years ago by the gates foundation, they specifically had a way to detect female mosquitoes (by the wing flapping rates, iirc) so they don't just zap indiscriminately.
> "Importantly, the device additionally uses millimeter-wave radar to scan its field of view for larger objects such as people and pets. If any of these are detected, its mosquito-zapping laser will not fire."
I note the startup doesn't actually disclose the laser output power anywhere, or what regulatory class that power level falls in. It's federal law[0] that commercially-sold lasers are labelled with this information.
[0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/21/1040.10
[0]: https://youtu.be/Ta0f0oB4I-Q?si=WqlhTmVHVszXSjtU
> 5 milliwatts is wimpy. We can do better.
A 1-watt laser is an extremely dangerous thing. It’s not just powerful enough to blind you—it’s capable of burning skin and setting things on fire. Obviously, they’re not legal for consumer purchase in the US.
Just kidding! You can pick one up for $300[1].
[0]: https://what-if.xkcd.com/13/
[1]: http://www.wickedlasers.com/arctic
and there are things that can be done.
heat and motion detectors that disarm the system if people/pets are present fields of fire that are above 99.999 % of peoples eyes fields of fire very close to walls, where mosquitos alight, but it is almost impossible to get in the way for humans multiple laser turrets that indivualy dont have the power to hurt a human badly, but can zap a bug through co ordinated action.....perhaps set up outdoors with artificial breath and infra red bait traps to bring the mosquitos above a crowd. more robust systems to be used in agricultural contexts. this will be about comfort and protecting vulnerable populations, mosquitos/other bugs wont be going anywhere, chemical control has proven to cause ecological probelms worse than the bugs, and the attempts at useing biological methods is only a partial solution.
A human eye being transparent up to the fragile retina, yes, a laser would penetrate the eye and be concentrated in an extremely small spot on the retina. That's exactly the reason why we have safety around lasers, and why everything above 5mw is strictly for enclosed use. 40 watts shot at random in the void is definitely dangerous by all measures.
I’d want to see some third-party testing around eye safety before putting this in my home.
Instead of laser, they should have made a mechanical hand with fly zapper, fragile/soft enough to not injure people and pets, yet strong enough to kill mosquito. Or even like in that movie where kung-fu master catches a fly using chopsticks :)
This isn't the best example, how is it supposed to hit your retina if your eyes are closed?
Microsoft alum fights malaria by zapping mosquitoes with lasers | ZDNET https://share.google/qd3yWi72Zk9yRyxoh
"The concept of a laser-based mosquito defence system took off back in 2007, when astrophysicist Lowell Wood (one of the architects of the USA's famous Reagan-era "Star Wars" missile defence initiative) raised the idea of a smaller, mosquito-targeting laser system at a Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation brainstorming session on eliminating malaria.
Over the following years, prototypes were built, using freely available parts from cell phones and laser printers. A device was patented and demonstrated by a company called Intellectual Ventures, which was more interested in owning the patent than making a product. "
I really hope that after copyright protections (insanely long, IMO) get revamped in the LLM aftermath, we start focusing on patent law. Patents were always in my mind a way to protect small_inventor from big_bad_corp, and give them a breathing room to get a product to market. We should really focus on this, and make patents moot as long as a) a working prototype is not demonstrated, b) the patent holder doesn't pursue the tech, c) a small domain-specific timeframe (less for medicine for example) and d) it's really really generic (i.e. a method to have LLM agents work in a loop - no, bobby, everyone can do that.)
The fact it doesn't do houseflies is a huge downer though.