Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Behind the scenes with the Midjourney scanner [video]

youtube.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 52 posts

Re: Behind the scenes with the Midjourney scanner [video]

#11

Post by Fraterkes »

One thing that’s kinda awkward in the video: they mention one of the big shortcomings of ultrasound being that it can’t image “airy” organs like the lungs, and their expert responds to that by mentioning that the amount of angles/devices means that you still get imaging of everything surrounding the lungs.

But the critiscism isn’t that the lungs would obstruct you from imaging certain areas, it’s that there’s just very salient parts of the body that you can’t really image with ultrasound, which means this would not be a full bodyscan even if the resolution was incredible.

I think there’s some genuine intent here, if for no other reason than that it seems silly to transition from ai to hardware if you’re purely trying to grift. I just wish they responded candidly to the obvious questions people have.

Re: Behind the scenes with the Midjourney scanner [video]

#12

Post by IshKebab »

Fraterkes wrote: post #11

One thing that’s kinda awkward in the video: they mention one of the big shortcomings of ultrasound being that it can’t image “airy” organs like the lungs, and their expert responds to that by mentioning that the amount of angles/devices means that you still get imaging of everything surrounding the lungs. But the critiscism isn’t that the lungs would obstruct you from imaging certain areas, it’s that there’s just ve…

Not being able to image inside the lungs is probably only a minor limitation really. There's also inside the head, and inside the rib cage is going to be awkward too due to bones.

Also ultrasound just isn't that good of an imaging technology, even with full aperture.

That said, it's non-ionising and if they can make this reasonably cheap (big if), then it's better than nothing at all. Probably decent for finding cancer, especially breast cancer (no pesky bones there!).

Re: Behind the scenes with the Midjourney scanner [video]

#13

Post by IshKebab »

pcrh wrote: post #3

There's a risk of echos of Theranos here. A paper apparently describing this ultrasound approach has been uploaded to arXiv [0]. If so, the resolution demonstrated is nowhere near sufficient to detect small changes to anatomy, let alone monitor them over time. Future developments could obviously improve on that. [0] “Whole Cross-Sectional Human Ultrasound Tomography” https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.00110

This definitely isn't another Theranos. Theranos claimed to have a blood test that didn't actually exist. This is "just" standard ultrasound but with a much wider aperture than normal. There's no new science, it's just engineering that nobody else has put the effort in to actually do.

Re: Behind the scenes with the Midjourney scanner [video]

#14

Post by KaiserPro »

IshKebab wrote: post #12
Fraterkes wrote: post #11

One thing that’s kinda awkward in the video: they mention one of the big shortcomings of ultrasound being that it can’t image “airy” organs like the lungs, and their expert responds to that by mentioning that the amount of angles/devices means that you still get imaging of everything surrounding the lungs. But the critiscism isn’t that the lungs would obstruct you from imaging certain areas, it’s that there’s just ve…

Not being able to image inside the lungs is probably only a minor limitation really. There's also inside the head, and inside the rib cage is going to be awkward too due to bones. Also ultrasound just isn't that good of an imaging technology, even with full aperture. That said, it's non-ionising and if they can make this reasonably cheap ( big if), then it's better than nothing at all. Probably decent for finding can…

> it's non-ionising

True, but ultrasound isn't entirely benign. Depending on what frequency and what power it can crack solid parts of the body (its used to break up kidney/gall stones) it also can heat things up (which is, assuming my understanding is correct, why doppler scans for blood flow are not done on <18 week pregancy)

Re: Behind the scenes with the Midjourney scanner [video]

#15

Post by KaiserPro »

pcrh wrote: post #3

There's a risk of echos of Theranos here. A paper apparently describing this ultrasound approach has been uploaded to arXiv [0]. If so, the resolution demonstrated is nowhere near sufficient to detect small changes to anatomy, let alone monitor them over time. Future developments could obviously improve on that. [0] “Whole Cross-Sectional Human Ultrasound Tomography” https://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.00110

I have a similar feeling.

One the one hand its great that they are spending the time and money to do this, on the other hand I am _very_ suspicious of their motives.

Getting _a_ picture is not that difficult, getting an accurate, repeatable, high resolution picture is a lot harder, and state of the art.

my worry is two fold:

1) over promise and causing injury to desperate people who see smudges on scans and have invasive surgery only to find out that its a reflection/artefact

2) what are they doing with the data they collect, and how will it be used to make money.

I think the main issue is that there are "no good startups" any more. As soon as an innovation happens that might be worth something, your original CEO is replaced by someone driven entirely by money, rather than public good. Or they get bought out by a corp that only cares about maintaining a monopoly.

Re: Behind the scenes with the Midjourney scanner [video]

#16

Post by jkahrs595 »

KaiserPro wrote: post #14
IshKebab wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not being able to image inside the lungs is probably only a minor limitation really. There's also inside the head, and inside the rib cage is going to be awkward too due to bones. Also ultrasound just isn't that good of an imaging technology, even with full aperture. That said, it's non-ionising and if they can make this reasonably cheap ( big if), then it's better than nothing at all. Probably decent for finding can…

> it's non-ionising True, but ultrasound isn't entirely benign. Depending on what frequency and what power it can crack solid parts of the body (its used to break up kidney/gall stones) it also can heat things up (which is, assuming my understanding is correct, why doppler scans for blood flow are not done on <18 week pregancy)

lasers can cut steel, so barcode scanners aren’t entirely benign

Re: Behind the scenes with the Midjourney scanner [video]

#17

Post by 21asdffdsa12 »

Fraterkes wrote: post #11

One thing that’s kinda awkward in the video: they mention one of the big shortcomings of ultrasound being that it can’t image “airy” organs like the lungs, and their expert responds to that by mentioning that the amount of angles/devices means that you still get imaging of everything surrounding the lungs. But the critiscism isn’t that the lungs would obstruct you from imaging certain areas, it’s that there’s just ve…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquid_breathing ? So totally solveable

I dont understand though, why you have to simultanously do this from all sides- have the ultrasound swim around with the patient? Takes out the comlexity?

Or use boundary layers to keep the sound on the slice? Turn this cocktail glass full of patient into a tequila sunrise?

Re: Behind the scenes with the Midjourney scanner [video]

#19

Post by deadbabe »

I’m just wondering when people are going to realize sticking your body into water being vibrated with ultrasound isn’t a good idea?

I used to have ultrasonic cleaner for jewelry and one of the things advised is to not put your hand in the water when it’s vibrating as it can be bad for your bones.

Re: Behind the scenes with the Midjourney scanner [video]

#20

Post by [deleted] »

Fraterkes wrote: post #11

One thing that’s kinda awkward in the video: they mention one of the big shortcomings of ultrasound being that it can’t image “airy” organs like the lungs, and their expert responds to that by mentioning that the amount of angles/devices means that you still get imaging of everything surrounding the lungs. But the critiscism isn’t that the lungs would obstruct you from imaging certain areas, it’s that there’s just ve…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN