248

The blue LED was supposed to be impossible—until a young engineer proposed a moonshot idea.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Agent641@lemmy.world 67 points 11 months ago

Making blue LEDs is easy. Just make a red one, then move towards it really fast.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Clent@lemmy.world 62 points 11 months ago

Excellent counter example to anyone claiming that we need patent and copyright to innovate.

This man made nothing on his invention and was not motivated by money but fame.

There are endless of examples of how those who do things for money hold back the creativity that leads to innovation. This is one of them. It almost didn't happen because his pursuit was not seen as profitable.

[-] faultyproboscus@sh.itjust.works 26 points 11 months ago

Sure, but the company fronted the millions of dollars required to develop the technology. The investment needs to come from somewhere.

That doesn't have to be a private company, though. We need public funding that retains the patent rights, if not just to make the invention free from licensing costs to manufacture.

The insane thing about our current system is that we do have public funding, but private companies wind up with the patent anyway

[-] Clent@lemmy.world 31 points 11 months ago

The company didn't invent it. A person did. The company almost stopped it from being invented. They didn't spend millions inventing this. A person spent tens of thousands of hours inventing it.

That the funding is only available from a company is a result of the patent system. It does not spur development, it perverts it. Any ideas to the contrary are propaganda.

People have been inventing shit longer than corporations have existed. People have been inventing things without any guarantee on return on investment for most of human history.

Capitalism is bullshit and the capitalization of ideas harms humanity.

[-] lud@lemm.ee 14 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Maybe they didn't invent it. But he wouldn't and couln't have invented it without them.

Someone would have invented it eventually though.

[-] Clent@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Correct. With or with patents and with or without copyright, it eventually would have been invented.

Edit: Curious if you watched the full video. It clearly indicates that all corporate efforts were heading in an opposite direction and that the path this inventor took was considered to be not profitable and not worth the investment by everyone else working on this. The company he worked for wanted to shut down his research and focus on following the herd. No one else was close to his level of progress and capitalist interests almost scuttled this invention.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] LarmyOfLone@lemm.ee 5 points 11 months ago

Yeah it's pretty bad and nobody talks about it. Nobody researches the effects of patents on our global civilization. I suspect the practical role of patents is to actually retard innovation - something gets improved or invented or most of the time just engineered to work better and monopolization or just paperwork makes it too expensive for wide spread adoption. This in turn helps prevents disruptive technology from making large scale investments obsolete - instead of having to adopt and improve your factories you can continue as before because any innovation will be slow and also priced to be around as expensive as existing solutions. Or the patent can just be bought. And even if an inventor has noble intentions, starting manufacturing yourself is a totally different skill set so like most startups often fails and then the patent gets sold off. Innovation becomes a commodity.

This is my logical conclusion but it's speculative. I suspect researching negative effects of patents is a somewhat "taboo" topic for scientists to research.

In regards to climate change this becomes... genocidal. We have hundreds of thousands of industrial processes that rely on fossil fuels or certain levels of energy. With all the before mentioned effects this basically made a timely response to climate change impossible. Every little improvement to existing processes is patented and maximized for profit. Basically we never had a chance.

[-] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago

This man made nothing on his invention and was not motivated by money but fame.

And then he sued the company for $20 million because the CEO didn't want to respect his efforts and stiffed him.

[-] Clent@lemmy.world 18 points 11 months ago

And the amount he actually won only covered the legal fees, so he made nothing.

[-] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

And if he had been granted a patent for his invention, he would have been fairly compensated for his work by being able to license production to companies that had the means to make them at scale. OP seems to think this scenario is an example of how patents should be abolished, but it's a perfect example of why we have them in the first place. And that reason is so that rich people don't fuck over comparatively poor inventors.

[-] Clent@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Your cognitive dissonance is why we cannot improve this system. Patents cannot both be responsible for his lack of profit from his invention and how he would have been fairly compensated.

Patents do exists and we was not fairly compensated, therefore patent do not solve their intended problem.

We live in this reality. Not whatever rose colored version you think could exist if we just get the correct tweaks in place.

At some point we need to stop trying to adapt the concepts people came up with hundreds of years ago. Created in a world that no longer resembles our own.

Consider how contentious the issue was that they redefined to included it in the constitution. The consider what other contentious issues were also included in that same document, i.e. the three fifths compromise.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Damdy@lemmy.world 50 points 11 months ago

Haven't watch the video yet, but I remember how impressed my step dad was with the blue LED when we got our PlayStation 2. I was like, yeah great whatever let's play games, at the time.

[-] sebinspace@lemmy.world 42 points 11 months ago

Really annoying that the company shat on him for years, and continued to do so after he multiplied the value of the company. Toxic behavior.

[-] avidamoeba@lemmy.ca 40 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It's an extreme example that perfectly illustrates how profit is extracted from employees by the employers. He didn't have any leverage to get a larger share of the profit from his labor, as is the case with most employees. You could call it toxic behavior, and it is, but it's the expected behavior, the behavior incentivised by the system.

[-] Cethin@lemmy.zip 13 points 11 months ago

It also shows how capitalism hinder innovation. It doesn't create it. The potentially innovative path took money without any guarantee of creating profit. It's bad business to be innovative. Capitalism prioritizing profit never chooses the best path, even if it gets a good ending eventually despite itself.

load more comments (34 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] rob_t_firefly@lemmy.world 36 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

My favorite thing about widely-available blue LEDs was the effect on TV scifi.

Watch the Star Trek shows made in the 1980s and 1990s and the tricorders, alien gadgets, and other props were always twinkling with red, yellow, and green LEDs to look futuristic. A generation later and every single hand prop on 2000s Doctor Who, Torchwood, etc. glowed and twinkled blue because the LEDs had just become cheap enough for prop makers, but weren't yet widespread in day-to-day life so the viewers were seeing something strange and unusual.

Now every color of LED imaginable is just common and whatever, but for a good stretch of time glowy blue became the standard "scifi" color just because that particular tech happened to turn up at that particular time.

[-] aStonedSanta@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago

Purple still seems to be a tough one for most rgb devices I’ve used lol

[-] filcuk@lemmy.zip 6 points 11 months ago

They're still rgb plus maybe yw using colour mixing, so depending on the quality, tuning, physics and our perceptionof light, not all colours are as nice or bright.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Lanky_Pomegranate530@midwest.social 19 points 11 months ago

Here is an Odysee Link for those that don't want to give youtube support.

[-] porkchop@lemm.ee 18 points 11 months ago

Just a PSA for those who don’t know… no shade against Odysee… I’ve just encountered folks here who don’t know this:

Veritassium and many others on YouTube make their living by the advertising shown on YT. If you’re a premium member, even more money goes to the creator when you watch their content. It’s this very money that allows independent creators to create more / better content!

[-] SuperSpruce@lemmy.zip 5 points 11 months ago

I wish he posted his stuff on Nebula as well. His stuff totally fits the vibe of the platform, and would potentially make him even more money.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] pedestrian@links.hackliberty.org 13 points 11 months ago

Shuji Nakamura was a researcher at Nichia who was determined to create the first blue LED, which had eluded scientists for decades. Through innovative crystal growth techniques and materials discoveries, he succeeded in developing bright blue and white LEDs in the early 1990s. This breakthrough enabled LEDs to be used for full-spectrum lighting. Nichia's fortunes grew enormously as a result, though Nakamura was not properly compensated for his invention. Today, LEDs powered by Nakamura's blue LED technology are ubiquitous and have brought enormous energy savings worldwide.

Something interesting I found was that Nakamura persisted in his research for blue LEDs against the wishes of his company management, who saw it as a waste of resources. His stubbornness and belief in his work paid off by solving a problem that had stumped the electronics industry for 30 years.

[-] Steak@lemmy.ca 19 points 11 months ago

He really got screwed. They didn't want him even working on blue LEDs and then when he was right and actually made one they gave him nothing and made hundreds of millions of dollars. Then sued him when he left to work for another company for "leaking company secrets" which was really all his work. He counter sued and the courts awarded him like 189 million, then the company counter sued back and he got 8 million which just covered his legal fees.

[-] fluxion@lemmy.world 7 points 11 months ago

Wow... for brief, fleeting moment i thought justice prevailed in the end. Silly me.

load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Dmian@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

The blue led was released in 1993. I remember reading an article in Wired magazine (back when magazines were published on paper) about the invention. Gladly, the article is still available online: https://www.wired.com/1995/03/blue-laser/

I talked with some friends about the “true boo-roo” led, and the phrase stuck with us (that’s why I still remember the article). At the time (almost 30 years ago) we had no idea how important the invention was, even when we realized that it allowed for rgb led light.

But we had no idea leds would be miniaturized to be used in screens and be as ubiquitous as they are today. Living through all this technology evolution has been quite the ride.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Clanket@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

That was an excellent watch, thanks for sharing.

YouTube is horrendous for ads though.

[-] downhomechunk@midwest.social 9 points 11 months ago

I didn't watch this, but i bet technology connections video about blue Christmas lights is more entertaining!

[-] Leviathan@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago

Which one? The man can't stop making videos about blue Christmas lights!

[-] Zanshi@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

All of them! I like Veritasium though, not every video is a banger but this one definitely is

[-] JATtho@lemmy.world 8 points 11 months ago

This was an yet another glorious episode from veritasium.

I hope we get well past UVC LEDs. (i.e., shorter wavelengths) UV LEDs are already available. Unfortunately, this progress will stop before X-ray light. With +1 KeV energy, you pretty much must blast off the electrons from the atoms to emit X-rays, which an x-ray tube already does. Or by peeling off a piece of scotch tape.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 10 points 11 months ago

Maybe making X-ray emitters cheap enough to put in a flashlight isn't the best idea anyway.

load more comments (12 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] boredtortoise@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It seems that the blue led is picked by many manufacturers now for its coolness factor. There are so many appliances people have in sleeping areas with blue lights glaring and disturbing sleep

[-] PM_Your_Nudes_Please@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

It’s such a big problem that there’s literally LED dimming tape on the market. It’s semi-transparent tape that you stick over the blue LEDs, to knock them down to a more reasonable brightness. It’s akin to putting sunglasses on your appliances.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 11 months ago

The first blue LED I ever saw was on the dashboard of my mom's VW Golf. I always wanted one like that, but now they're everywhere!

[-] JoMomma@lemm.ee 9 points 11 months ago
[-] KyuubiNoKitsune@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 11 months ago

Agreed, though the original wasn't as bright as the one in the pic. It was a frosted LED and was relatively dim.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] linuxPIPEpower@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 11 months ago

I freaking hate blue LEDs.

I actively avoid buying anything with a blue LED because they are so obnoxious. So bright. Why do I want to read by the light of my HDD? Does this video explain why they have to be like that?

Maybe if you have a separate wing of the mansion to do computing stuff it is not annoying. But if like a lot of people you have electronics in your living space, these lights are extremely disruptive.

It seems that can't really be dimmed.. I had to give up on a couple of blue backlit alarm clocks because there is no way that the time can be visible without illuminating the whole area around them.

For whatever reason, red is the best one. I would prefer another color aesthetically. For whatever reason, red is the only color that does what it has to do and nothing more.

[-] FiFoFree@lemmy.world 12 points 11 months ago

If you own anything with "white" LEDs, I have some bad news for you...

[-] lud@lemm.ee 6 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Or reading this on anything except an e-reader or if someone else printed it out on a printer without blue leds first.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] WillBalls@lemmy.world 6 points 11 months ago

This is actually a biological phenomenon that most humans experience! Our eyes are more attuned to greens and blues rather than reds, so green and blue light appear brighter as the cones in our eyes are more sensitive to those colors. Similarly, our cones are less sensitive to red so it appears darker.

There's also a physics component to this as well since red light has about half the energy (twice the wavelength) as blue light. However, since there's a difference in energy, the engineer must take that into account when designing multicolor LED applications so as to keep a level light intensity when changing or blending colors.

Here's an eli5 question with some more info: https://www.reddit.com/r/explainlikeimfive/comments/ghx9g6/eli5_why_does_red_light_seem_darker/?rdt=58820

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] lvxferre@mander.xyz 5 points 11 months ago

A few details as further info, focusing mostly on the technical aspects:

It's considerably easier to decrease the band gap than to increase it. Decreasing it only requires that you insert some material to provide an intermediate band, while increasing it would likely need alloying it to force some structural change.

The material being in the right band gap is not enough. You need to make sure that it can be p-doped and n-doped, that its crystalline structure is stable even with some temperature variation. Ah, it should be also relatively straightforward to produce industrially.

Then you get the little gem that Nakamura found.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2024
248 points (97.0% liked)

Technology

60337 readers
4623 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS