A Covid-Friendly Wearable Shocks You With 450 Volts When You Touch Your Face (medium.com) 78
A reporter for Medium's tech site OneZero recently spotted an especially bizarre ad on Instagram:
The ad features a GIF of a person wearing a Fitbit-style wristband, with the text "Eliminate Cravings." Across the frame from their hand sits a giant slice of cake. As the person reaches towards the cake, the wristband turns red and zaps them with electricity. You can tell it's zapping them because the whole frame vibrates, and little lightning bolts shoot out of the wristband, like in an old-school Batman movie. All that's missing is an animated "POW!"
At first, I thought it must be either a joke or a metaphor...
Nope. It turns out the Pavlok is exactly what the ad suggests: a Bluetooth-connected, wearable wristband that uses accelerometers, a connected app, and a "snap circuit" to shock its users with 450 volts of electricity when they do something undesirable. The device costs $149.99 and is available on Amazon. The company says it has over 100,000 customers who use the device to help kill food cravings, quit smoking, and to stop touching their face... I immediately saw two fundamental truths at the exact same time. Firstly, the mere existence of an automated self-flagellation wristband is proof that we've reached Peak Wearables. And second, this is the perfect device for Our Times...
Pavlok's founder says he came up with the idea for the company after paying an assistant to slap him every time he went on Facebook.... Through a Chrome extension, it can also (Doom scrollers rejoice) automatically punish actions like spending too much time on Facebook, Twitter, and other potentially time-wasting websites. It can zap you when you open too many Chrome tabs — a use case I'd love to recommend to several programmer friends... But perhaps the most relevant feature for today's world is the ability to program the device to shock you every time you touch your face. This is something which humans do alarmingly often — up to 16 times per hour. The practice has been implicated in spreading coronavirus, or at least contaminating face masks and leading to wasted PPE...
Pavlok may sound bizarre, but it's just the logical extension of an overall trend toward using tech to tweak and prod our brains into new ways of thinking... Pavlok acts as the metaphorical stick to these apps' carrots, giving you the option to beat your brain into submission instead of just tweaking it.
In 2016 Mark Cuban called Pavlok "everything but a legitimate product" in what was probably one of the least-success Shark Tank appearances ever. But Medium's reporter seems convinced it's the appropriate response to this moment in time. "I only need to look at Twitter to feel that I'm being jolted awake with a powerful electrical shock...
"The real thing feels kind of appropriate."
At first, I thought it must be either a joke or a metaphor...
Nope. It turns out the Pavlok is exactly what the ad suggests: a Bluetooth-connected, wearable wristband that uses accelerometers, a connected app, and a "snap circuit" to shock its users with 450 volts of electricity when they do something undesirable. The device costs $149.99 and is available on Amazon. The company says it has over 100,000 customers who use the device to help kill food cravings, quit smoking, and to stop touching their face... I immediately saw two fundamental truths at the exact same time. Firstly, the mere existence of an automated self-flagellation wristband is proof that we've reached Peak Wearables. And second, this is the perfect device for Our Times...
Pavlok's founder says he came up with the idea for the company after paying an assistant to slap him every time he went on Facebook.... Through a Chrome extension, it can also (Doom scrollers rejoice) automatically punish actions like spending too much time on Facebook, Twitter, and other potentially time-wasting websites. It can zap you when you open too many Chrome tabs — a use case I'd love to recommend to several programmer friends... But perhaps the most relevant feature for today's world is the ability to program the device to shock you every time you touch your face. This is something which humans do alarmingly often — up to 16 times per hour. The practice has been implicated in spreading coronavirus, or at least contaminating face masks and leading to wasted PPE...
Pavlok may sound bizarre, but it's just the logical extension of an overall trend toward using tech to tweak and prod our brains into new ways of thinking... Pavlok acts as the metaphorical stick to these apps' carrots, giving you the option to beat your brain into submission instead of just tweaking it.
In 2016 Mark Cuban called Pavlok "everything but a legitimate product" in what was probably one of the least-success Shark Tank appearances ever. But Medium's reporter seems convinced it's the appropriate response to this moment in time. "I only need to look at Twitter to feel that I'm being jolted awake with a powerful electrical shock...
"The real thing feels kind of appropriate."
alarmingly? (Score:2, Informative)
What nonsense, nothing bad will happen if you touch your face, zero peer reviewed papers to support that.
Re: (Score:2)
Well people who wear it, deserve it. Instant karma.
Re: (Score:2)
The idea of not touching your face comes from the time when the primary transmission vector was from touching surfaces.
Re: (Score:2)
Now it seems clear that the primary transmission vector is through the air, in little pieces of spittle.
Do you have sources for the papers that have shown this? I need some ammo to show the anti mask crowd.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have sources for the papers that have shown this? I need some ammo to show the anti mask crowd.
It's beyond obvious at this point. Just google, "how do infectious respiratory diseases spread" and voila, there's your answer: through the air, by exhaled water droplets.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Send them a link to this wired article [wired.com]. It references some studies, but is one of the few apolitical, unbiased articles I've seen that doesn't try to rewrite history to make some political point.
In this case the authorities seriously fucked up and some pro-authority types are trying to whitewash it as the natural process of science, but that is not what it was. It was pure politics. Their anti-mask positions had zero basis in science.
Re: (Score:3)
What's the point of that, other than to let others know that... you care. You're better than they are, because you're willing to... fucking shock yourself to keep them safe. And, rest assured, people who buy this will regularly and deliberately shoc
Re:alarmingly? (Score:4, Informative)
It's well established by many peer reviewed studies, most from decades ago, that touching your face with virus or certain bacteria on your hands increases the risk of infection. It's obvious why, your face contains multiple orifices that are designed to draw things inside your body.
They teach this to nurses and doctors. Learning how to use PPE involves learning how to put it on and take it off without spreading anything on the outside of them to your face.
Re: alarmingly? (Score:2)
But even so, I would think it's just the eyes, nose and mouth that ultimately need to be protected, right?
Re: (Score:2)
false, there are certain viruses proved to be that way, like a handful of the "common cold" viruses. It is NOT true in general, and is NOT how covid19 spreads. Making shit up that sounds good to yourself is not wise.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about that. I once pranked a guy at the office by emptying a toner cartridge on his black keyboard. As he touched his face throughout the day plenty of bad things happened, mostly shame and humiliation.
Mind you I'm not sure what you're going for with needing peer reviewed papers. Are you under the impression that viruses bury themselves through the skin? Because you don't need a peer review paper, just an intro to medicine textbook to show that disease vectors require an entry into the body.
Sid
Re: (Score:2)
But covid19 is not one of the viruses spread that way, it's why there is little worry about money, packages, etc. There are viruses spread that way, some of the 200+ "common cold" ones are and there have been experiments to prove it. covid19 is built for your lungs
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
News that Matters (Score:2)
Never mentions the amperage.
I'd suggest 20 or 30 amps would work well in this device.
Could be handy for Electroshock or maybe even as an AED device if you can toss in a big enough capacitor. /s
Having a V-Fib or V-Tach event? Touch your face...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's a bold claim. Can you show us a demonstration?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So, you refuse to provide experimental evidence? Thought so.
Re: (Score:2)
But for those that don't know: the conventional wisdom among those working with electricity is that >=0.05A DC through the human heart are lethal.
Besides of that the internet had a "Covid-Friendly" idea to prevent people from touching their faces a long time ago.
They said that people should dip their fingers into pepper spray or hot sauce at least. That should teach them to their faces in sensitive areas like the eyes and nose.
In my opinion, tho
Re: (Score:2)
I found that wearing a mask and glasses where appropriate (i.e. every closed place with people in it) does the job more than adequately. I really don't know why we need amperes and capsaicin, when there are methods that are so much simpler, more effective and without any danger except some hurt feelings.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure if this even is a genuine product. For one, there's the potential for this to go very wrong, as I've mentioned operating heavy machinery. So these would probably not be compatible with traffic. Therefore I can also read some idea to deliver social commentary into this, like with the idea of using capsaicin.
That is because many people are slow to learn some new behaviour if the negative feedback for doing an undesirable thing isn't strong enough. Hence su
Re: (Score:2)
I think a treatment of the subject without investigating the role of the vector potential could be dangerously incomplete.
BTW, someone downthread posted a very funny video of a guy trying to run hundreds of amperes through his tongue.
I LOL-ed and heartily recommend it.
Re: (Score:2)
Current isn't just something that you apply to something. You apply an electric potential (colloquially called Voltage) to something. That electric potential is more or less an electrical field in which the charged particles (electrons) are accelerated. This is analogous to the pressure of water for example. This then results in a current, that is analogous to a flow rate, depending on what kind of resistance you want to push your fluid or electricit
Re: (Score:2)
To put that into perspective, that is about a 3rd of what a single nuclear reactor on a nuclear submarine provides.
Yeah, these numbers are, like, totally overdone, man.
Just the other day I was playing with mah laser and I shortened the 1 millijoule impulse to 0.25 attoseconds. The books said I'd get a Peta-watt or four, and I was expecting at least a Death Star, but I got more bang from an electrolytic capacitor plugged in reverse.
Really average.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's a guy shocking himself with 20A.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Where's your proof that 2A kills?
Re: (Score:2)
No interest to look at this, but to get 20A into a human body, you need extremely high voltages. Apparently you people do not know Ohm's law and are unaware that a human body has a resistance in the 10kOhm range. With 20A that makes 200kV needed, and an power transfer of 4MW. That is enough to cause a pretty bad vapor-explosion in the area affected, probably killing the person from that explosion alone.
Re: (Score:2)
Whoops, sorry, my bad. He used 150A. Made sure to watch the video again and realized that I was watching the voltage reading on his PSU and not the current.
Hey, at least I watched it. I'd hate to leave a comment about the video without even watching it and noticing his math with regard to the body's resistance and such. Gosh, that would be a silly thing to do.
Re: (Score:2)
2 amps can kill. Asshole!
Actually, 2 A will burn large holes in your skin. The level that can kill is much, much lower.
Re: (Score:2)
2 amps can kill. Asshole!
For your education: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
10ma subdermally can kill.
Re: (Score:2)
To quote Horowitz, calling the current "amperage" is strictly bush league. Don't do it.
Assumes It Works For Dick Grabbers Too (Score:2)
Sounds like a very useful tool to stop dudes from grabbing their dicks all the fucking time.
Re: Assumes It Works For Dick Grabbers Too (Score:1)
What about the subset (Score:1)
Sounds like a very useful tool to stop dudes from grabbing their dicks all the fucking time.
You know there is a very large subset of dudes that would be very into having shocks administered when they "touched themselves", and therefore it would increase overall dick grabbing?
if it has batteries it might as well self sanitize (Score:1)
how about something that kills the virus instead of your brain cells and nerve endings, eh?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
As much as I sympathize with the angst about whatever is happening in your life that must have driven you to displace your aggression onto this conversation, I don't actually think you're characterizing the problem correctly here. This is a plain obvious example of having too much stupidity, haste, and greed in the same room with all the money. Put me in that room before they decide how to spend the money next time and there would be a different outcome.
Wear eye protection with your mask. (Score:3)
Re: Wear eye protection with your mask. (Score:2)
no evidence covid19 infects from face touching. nor that eye covering is needed. good masks help some, distance is most important of all.
Re: (Score:2)
Is there evidence to the contrary? Just because you haven't read a paper on something doesn't it isn't the case.
If a surface is covered with viruses and you touch that surface and then rub your eyes, explain to me how you would not catch the virus if you just stuck it in your eyes.
The jury is out, better to be cautious than to be one of the ~30% of people that have lingering symptoms for months after they caught COVID19 or the 1% that die. And that 30% with lingering symptoms includes young people and peopl
Re: (Score:2)
You are confused, I point out an assertion is made without a shred of proof. You are talking out of your ass. Proof is required to say touching face is mechanism of infection for covid19. There are some viruses spread by contact with papers of proof, covid19 is not one of them.
Re: (Score:2)
How much proof is needed? Do you require that they do tests and spread live viruses on surfaces and then have people touch those surfaces to see if they catch COVID19? Because that obviously is not going to be done. There has however been tests done to show that the virus does survive for hours or days on various types of surface
The virus attaches to ACE2 receptors to infect a person, the face has ACE2 receptors. These things are
Re: (Score:2)
Test like that indeed have been done with viruses, look it up.
You are being illogical and unscientific. You say. **The virus attaches to ACE2 receptors to infect a person, the face has ACE2 receptors.**
That is proof of nothing regarding infection. Covid19 is not known to spread that way.
The virus attaches to ACE2 receptors in the lungs and causes infection if a very significant amount present. That is the truth, there is a minimal load needed to cause infection. Surfaces don't do it, touching face doesn
Re: (Score:2)
You have no evidence to support your assertion whilst there is clearly evidence to show that corona-viruses can be caught by face touching. So who is being illogical here?
Re: (Score:2)
Liar, you are the one with zero evidence and the virus is claimed by experts to be spread by droplets in breath only, full stop. It's why packages and money aren't a concern. You are asserting someone with nothing to back you, I am asserting something with proof. Stop spewing misinformation and lies.
Re: (Score:2)
no evidence covid19 infects from face touching. nor that eye covering is needed. good masks help some, distance is most important of all.
In vitro evidence here. [scmp.com] I'm sure if you dig you can find the published paper. I also recall reading about a doctor that got infected in the early stages by rubbing his eye. I believe that was what triggered the overblown response about eye protection, but it would be wrong to take no precaution at all.
Re: Wear eye protection with your mask. (Score:2)
I've wondered about the occasional suggestions that one can get infected via the eyes. If so, one would expect to be able to find data about people wearing eyeglasses having a lower infection rate. That's such a large subset of the population that it should be easy to get a sample big enough to detect even a small effect. I don't know if anyone has looked for this.
Re: (Score:2)
I've wondered about the occasional suggestions that one can get infected via the eyes. If so, one would expect to be able to find data about people wearing eyeglasses having a lower infection rate. That's such a large subset of the population that it should be easy to get a sample big enough to detect even a small effect. I don't know if anyone has looked for this.
Eyeglasses don't generally cover your eyes, they provide small barriers directly in front of them--recent styles being much smaller than in the past. Fluid dynamics being what they are, I don't think prescription eyeglasses or most sunglasses would do much.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't use my eyes to lick my fingers.
Shocks You With 450 Volts When You Touch Your Face (Score:2)
"Touch your face"... and here I thought it was mostly touching your eyes and nose that did the introduction damage. Your mouth, maybe; depends on if it eventua
When you touch -- your face? (Score:5, Funny)
Hmm... The one my wife got me apparently works differently.
This gets dumber by the day. (Score:3)
Listen, ... a mask and a stupid gimmick won't teach people literally too stupid to live, the common sense concepts of germ theory and basic chemical kinetics.
If COVID-19 wasn't so super-forgiving, they all be already dead by thr simple fact that they all put their food on the same conveyor belt at the supermarket that they later grab with their washed hands to put in their fridge, to then use those same hands to put stuff onto their sandwich or touch their faces at home.
Question: Do you wash the handle of your tap before touching it with your washed hands, or do you put the germs from when you touched it with your dirty hands right back onto your hands when closing the tap?
Cause in an actual biohazard zone (like a lab), doing the latter would be *guaranteed infection*.
But people buy fuckin automatic soap dispensers, like you would't only touch the soap with dirty hands before washing anyway ... --.--
Our cargo cult hygiene theater is not what makes us survive. It is mosty just sheer luck and chemical kinetics statistics.
This is great news! (Score:2)
This is great for one category of people (Score:3)
Those who wear face masks, while driving, alone.
Friendly? (Score:2)
On what planet is getting zapped with 450 volts considered "friendly"?
Look, it's impossible not to touch your face.
Telling people to not touch their faces is perfectly useless advice, just like "don't contract cancer" or "don't get in a car accident".
Re: Friendly? (Score:2)
1. It's "covid-friendly" not "human-friendly"
2. Probably an ironic sense of the word friendly.
3. Can't touch your face if you don't have hands... Safer than drinking bleach, but still not recommend.
I began to wonder if the preventative is worse than the disease.
Also, people are weirdly obsessed with masks. Making their own, sometime uselessly out of knit yarn. Buying fashion-friendly masks. Automatic masks. Spandex neck gaiters that work about as well as a screen door. N95 masks with valves. Wearing the mas
Re: (Score:2)
I began to wonder if the preventative is worse than the disease.
The preventative is not worse than the disease. An inconvenience, yes, but I'm pretty sure it's not worse than being sick for weeks or on a ventilator. And yes, I know that a lot of people have very mild symptoms, but those aren't the ones I'm concerned with.
When 99% of people are not able to wear a basic mask properly, we focus on some advanced details that simple don't matter when combined with our incompetence.
Agreed- a clear, information-based, nationwide mask mandate coming from competent leadership would make a huge difference. Unfortunately, we have Trump.
Re: (Score:2)
The preventative is not worse than the disease.
Small quibble, but injecting bleach and drinking god knows what is definitely worse than being on O2.
Most acute cases requiring hospitalization end up on O2 and don't end up on a ventilator. Several of my coworkers are confirmed cases, they all had pretty bad cases requiring some medical intervention (ER visit) and at home monitoring (pulse-ox). Two of my coworkers are still not 100% after 4 months of recovery. It's really nasty for some people, thankfully they survived it.
Re: (Score:2)
Small quibble, but injecting bleach and drinking god knows what is definitely worse than being on O2.
Small quibble, but this was about masks: "Agreed- a clear, information-based, nationwide mask mandate..."
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, I see your mistake, it's the entirety of COVID-19 related hysteria that is the topic.
You might think it's funny (Score:2)
But wait until governments start mandating this. I would not put it beneath them.
If that happens, where does it end? Locked metal shock collars? Explosive collars? Mandatory shock or explosive implants?
Better to be looking far ahead for that slippery slope before we wind up going down it.
$5 sunglasses can do the job too (Score:2)
At the Kmart, or the corner store.