Hacker News Reader

Comment by DrBoring | Hacker News Reader

I wonder if this tech will lead to better quality audio from toys/books/greeting-cards that produce sound. I often wonder if the poor quality in such applications is due to the tiny speaker, or a mixture of the playback hardware and low audio bitrate.

> the thin-film loudspeaker could provide active noise cancellation in clamorous environments, such as an airplane cockpit, by generating sound of the same amplitude but opposite phase; the two sounds cancel each other out.

What would such an environment sound like? For example, how far would your voice travel when speaking to the person sitting next to you?

View on HN

> I wonder if this tech will lead to better quality audio from toys/books/greeting-cards that produce sound.

Possibly. Eventually. We already have very high quality tiny sound drivers, they’re used in IEMs. They’re expensive though. The quality of the applications you asked about is mostly limited by BOM cost. If this new speaker can get it’s cost down, it seems like a big win especially for places that are space limited in depth.

> We already have very high quality tiny sound drivers, they’re used in IEMs

Also in mobile phones.

>toys/books/greeting-cards that produce sound.

What happens to this material when its cast out? Does it become toxic micro particles in our waters, bodies?

> Does it become toxic micro particles in our waters, bodies?

I think the answer to that question lays somewhere between maybe and probably.

I'm curious, what made you bring up the point ? Is micro-particle poisoning a common concern for you. Or perhaps it was it the context of micro-particles being used in the aforementioned products which have short ownership-periods ?

I'm not trying to dismiss your concern, I'm just curious why bring it up now.

On the topic of shortly-owned-products, I for one have a dislike for cheap plastic beach toys. For example, the retailer Dollar Tree sells plastic sand buckets that break at an amount of force easily exerted by a child. At the beach where I vacation, you can peer into any trashcan and find broken sand toys and foam boogie boards which only break after one day of use.

For whatever reason, I have been walking around with this "thats Microplastics in our blood!"

https://i.imgur.com/2LuS7ix.png

---

But literally, I think that this should be intrinsic to product design at this point, and anything short is criminal....

One should be responsible to think about product lifecycle as it pertains to the environment.

---

I have always been anti-pollution in every sense... and its getting our of fn control - and politicians should be melted at the stake (pour molten plastic over them) - as they have failed to hold ZERO petroleum (plastics) producing company TRULY accountable for anything.

If you disagree, show me positive ACTUAL meaningful progress in curtailing human waste?

> that this should be intrinsic to product design at this point

I don't think it is feasible to engineer products in a way which optimizes their disposal. Certainly that is not something most consumers are concerned with. Surely if it were, there would be fewer manufacturers selling junk fall-apart products.

> Politicians should be melted at the stake (pour molten plastic over them) - as they have failed to hold ZERO petroleum (plastics) producing company TRULY accountable for anything.

I find it unlikely that many politicians are interested in holding to account any plastics manufacturer for the pollution caused by their products. But, for exactly what should they be held accountable ?

And, on whose onus the proper disposal of plastics products? I say it's the consumer, not the manufacturer.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com