Sister was messing around with a UV light and noticed this on her phone screen under it. My phone does not have this (all I get is a grid of dots I’m pretty sure are to do with the touch screen).
All glowing unknowns under a UV light are considered Cum unless proven otherwise
Can confirm this is cum
“Oh man, it glows?”
-WKUK
is making sure the internal Cum is perfectly shaped a desirable job at the factory, i wonder?
The real desirable job is the guy who gets to cum in phones
That’s just from setting the glass. Totally natural phenomenon.
Depends, are you at the phone factory or the cum factory?
Not sure what it might be but shape and position match those of the wireless charging coil.
That wouldn’t be behind the screen nor rectangular
Charging coils can absolutely be rectangular.
They can’t be behind the battery, though, so this can’t be it.
They also can’t be that long and still work with any efficiency.
Oh, I thought that OP was asking for the circular shape, the rectangular one looks more like some short of graphic showing on the screen. But maybe the circle is just the reflection of the flashlight?
Yes, the circle is light from a light source…
Wouldn’t that be on the back side of the phone though? I suspect the battery would be between the coil and the display, making it impossible to see from this side under any kind of light.
That said, I donno WTF we’re seeing.
That would be my guess.
No, that was my guess!
Pretty sure it was Mrfriki’s guess.
They might have posted first but ShepherdsPie actually realized it first. I was there.
Might be the glue holding it in place.
OCA (optically clear adhesive) is spread as a thin layer between the digitizer and display. Any gaps would be easily visible with the naked eye.
Also, it’s cured with UV, but I’ve never seen it fluoresce.
What model phone, it might be the fingerprint sensor?
What I wondered, but double checked pixel 8 and 8 pro specs and it just has a normal sensor area towards the bottom of the screen.
Is there a screen protector?
Else this might help narrow things down
https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Google+Pixel+8a+Screen+Replacement/173219
Assuming it’s the top piece that’s different, the difference would be between these two parts
https://www.ifixit.com/en-ca/products/google-pixel-8a-screen-genuine?variant=43735546953925
https://www.ifixit.com/en-ca/products/google-pixel-8-screen-genuine?variant=42483463651525
Does she have a screen protector? Can you see the shape at all without uv light? My guess would be an air bubble under a screen protector, but that would be visible under normal condition, sometimes it could be hard to see.
Here’s mine (Xiaomi Mi 10):
It has no screen-protector. It does not emit blue light from the glass edges. In the center I think it’s slightly bluer than the rest of the screen. It is an amoled screen. Hope this helps somehow.
I dont know if they stick the glass with uv glue, they tend to do that with screen protectors for screens with curved edges, so that the protectors sticks better. Maybe it’s the glue reacting.
Backlight LCD screen perhaps? And if you have an Oled screen, that might be why you’re not seeing this on yours? I don’t know for sure tho…
I have a Pixel 8, and the one in the picture is an 8a/8pro (can’t remember which).
I think all Pixels have Oled, so i guess i’m wrong here… It is interesting for sure!
Would have been a lot more fun if the hand was speckled with suspicious white stains!
deleted by creator
The way it’s off center and out of focus, it’s probably a lens flare.
Dude your mom’s probably a lens flare
Google Gemini says:
The oval shape you’re seeing on your Pixel 8’s screen when exposed to UV light is likely due to the adhesive used within the phone’s display assembly. Here’s why:
- UV-reactive adhesive: Many modern phones use adhesives that contain fluorescent materials. These materials glow when exposed to UV light.
- Display layers: The adhesive is typically used to bond the various layers of the display (such as the glass, touch sensor, and LCD/OLED panel) together.
- Visible pattern: The pattern of the adhesive can sometimes be seen as an oval shape or other pattern when viewed under UV light. Important Note: While this is a common occurrence and generally harmless, it’s always a good idea to avoid prolonged exposure of your phone to UV light. Excessive UV exposure can potentially damage the phone’s screen or other components over time. Let me know if you have any other questions.
OCA is applied from edge to edge. If it was the adhesive, the whole screen would be lighting up. Also, OCA is cured with UV light, but it doesn’t fluoresce.
Well I don’t want to paste another Gemini response as Lemmy seems to hate it so (and I do too when someone is pretending like the text their showing is isn’t LLM created, when it is.)
Anyway I rephrased the question and added your info to it. It suggests the shape might be due to a polariser film, but I don’t agree with that as it too would fill the whole screen.
Gemini points out that it might be another part of the screen stack. Which I wouldn’t agree with. When you buy a replacement “screen”, you’re actually buying a stack of components and maybe one of those assembly processed uses a UV-fluorescent glue or component.
Who knows imagine a shruggie here im too lazy to copy one and then get the formatting right so it shows up properly even though I now realise it would’ve been faster to do that than write this sentence
Yeah the real issue for me is that in addition to not filling the screen, it’s also asymmetrical. So it can’t be something done on purpose.
Well if it was originally liquid and gets squeezed in between two thin parts during machine assembly, I could see it developing to be that shape.
That’s a good point. I don’t think it can be an adhesive, but maybe some other kind of layer?
Still odd that it’s fluorescent. If it’s that close to the front-facing camera (and meant to be spread over it), it would ruin any photo taken outside during the day.
Why are you getting downvoted? Because it’s an LLM response? There are others here that have suggested some of the same as this LLM response and they’re not being downvoted, so is it just the “AI is bad!!1!!!1” reaction?
(Serious question)
You can never trust a factual response from an LLM. Plain and simple. It’ll answer with confidence whether the information it comes up with is true or false.
Commeters presenting its answer as fact is not helping a discussion based on finding the answer.
No, you shouldn’t blindly trust whatever a chat bot outputs. You have to set your expectations correctly with an LLM. You have to learn and practice how to prompt to make the best of the utility of an LLM.
Understanding that an LLM is best at sorting data is the first step. A simple example is my use case from the other day: I was making a table for my company’s 2025 holiday schedule. We base our holidays on our local union holiday schedule. Currently, the union has the 2024 schedule posted on its webpage. I took a screenshot of the schedule which was listed as
Holiday Date Day Christmas December 25 Wednesday
And so on for the 10 or so days.
I uploaded the screenshot JPG and asked ChatGPT to format the list in the JPG as a table. It quickly gave me a nicely formatted text table of the 2024 holiday schedule from the image’s data. I then asked it to update the table data for 2025 dates and days and it did so easily. I verified the days were correct - they were - and copied the table onto my word letterhead and posted to our SharePoint site. It was very useful - a simple example.
You need to take everything with a grain of salt when it comes to LLMs and really understand what the LLM is and how it works. Set your expectations correctly and it can be a very powerful utility.
It’s unfortunate that folks just rage out at the sight of LLMs, maybe because they had a bad experience themselves. I think people want it to be a Jarvis and it’s just not that. It feels like you can just talk to it and it’ll just understand and give you the right answer but it won’t. It has to reply with something that it rationalizes as the most likely answer; which words should I output that are most likely what the user wants to see? This is why most output sounds like it’s “fact”. But it doesn’t know from fact, only how to sort data.
So, yes, you should never blindly trust an LLM output, but you can practice how to prompt, and really ask yourself what do I need from my unsorted data that I’m feeding this chat bot? Am I giving it enough data to sort through? Because if you don’t prompt with enough data it will fill in the blanks as best it can and that may result in something totally different than what you expected.
tl;dr
FWIW, I never said LLMs were useless. I just said you can’t trust its output. Go ahead and use it to narrow down your search for the facts but if you cite it as fact I’m going to downvote you.
No worries. I just like having conversations with others about tech I’m in to
For me it’s not “AI bad” it’s a matter of coming here to talk to other people and to read what other people are saying.
If I wanted to hear what ChatGPT or Claude thinks, I would go ask them.
I’m fine with “I checked with a LLM and it suggested screen adhesive.” I guess. Things describing one’s experience. But just dumping output… sigh.
The AI is definitely why. It’s not well liked on Lemmy and Gemini is especially bad when it comes to credible information.
That said, I’m sure this is one rare occasion where it’s probably the right answer. Glue is really the only thing anyone has suggested that makes sense to me, as it’s the only thing that would be where it is and glow under UV light. Well… I guess it could be cum. 🤔
I’m just not sure about that being correct, though. It shouldn’t be correct. I repair phones all the time, including screens and digitizers. All the adhesives are edge to edge. If this screen looks completely fine in normal light with no air gaps or peeling or anything, I can’t think of any reason why this would be going on. It can’t really exist where the oled and the digitizer/outer glass are.
My guess is that it’s something attached to the back side of the oled, further inside the phone. The adhesive used to bind the oled and digitizer together doesn’t show up under UV light. There also wouldn’t be two different adhesives used.
Probably. LLMs are good at summarizing search results - but they represent everything as true whether it is or not.
I don’t really care.
I’ve been using Gemini on my phone now just to test how good it is.
It still hallucinates quite a lot, like wrong dates for movie releases or stuff like that, but a lot of the times it’s actually been useful. Cooking related things it does pretty well, as the info on those isn’t really that varied and never political or anything so.
It’s still a tremendous waste of energy and water resources, take two seconds extra to click a search result.
Well the AI’s themselves are yeah, but it’d take me a lot longer to write that down into google instead of just saying “Hey Google, I’m shining a UV light on a pixel 8, what’s that oval on the screen”.
I’m not gonna refrain from using them as if me quitting them would make any difference to the global energy consumption.
I don’t even aways wash the jam jars I throw to the glass recycling and sometimes I won’t bother to rip the small bits of plastic from juices cans to toss them into cardboard recycling, so I’ll just toss the entire thing to the burnable waste bin.
And despite knowing I could be more helpful, I find that the largest issues aren’t on the level of the consumer and my choices make very little difference.
I like talking to Gemini to a) see what it can and can’t do and b) improve it through use.
I’m honestly considering getting the pro for at least the 30 days trial. But I’m gonna put that off for now.
Before Gemini I used the Google Assistant. It gives shorter answers and is better and some things, but I mostly use it to control my smart lighting and for that both work equally well and Gemini’s voice(s) is(/are) more pleasing.
The other day I got Gemini to admit Google is lying to me. Took less than 10 minutes. I was just amusing my self and probing the edges of Gemini’s behaviour. (I got a recording if anyone wants to see it)
I think we can all agree that none of us are going to convince you, and you aren’t going to convince any of us.
No, we can’t all agree that you, a single person, speak for what thousands of others think.
And what exactly is it you’re trying to convince me of? Not to use the features of my phone because we need to save the Earth? Keeping in mind that companies like to shift blame to consumers, despite us having negligible impact in comparison to pretty much any industry; Wanna compare carbon footprints?
https://www.footprintcalculator.org/en/results/0/facts-figures
If yours is smaller than mine, I’d be surprised. And that isn’t too comprehensive of a quiz. Mine is probably smaller than it calculates. Aside from underwear, I never buy new clothing. I don’t fly to vacations or even have any. I don’t own a car. I bike everywhere. I use local groceries and don’t eat a lot of meat and when I do I preferably game which doesn’t have the same environmental effects.
I don’t know what my “sin” here is so would you mind telling me what it is I’m supposed to be convincing you of?
edit: Just got my energy bill today and actually I’m on 100% renewables as per my contract so my footprint is actually even smaller. I notice how none of you downvoters can compare your footprints to mine.
Lol you’re demonstrating my point.
Whether or not it’s your intention, you’re being defensive and belligerent. So people are less likely to support your position.
If you’re willing to pay for AI, I feel Gemini is a bad bet. I’ve got far better results from ChatGPT (free version).
Yeah but it’s not integrated into my phone, and I don’t use them on PC.
I would just like to see if there really is a difference so taking a played subscription from a service I haven’t used wouldn’t really offer contrast in how much difference there is between the free and the paid versions.
I haven’t really thought up any issues that require the features the pro has but it might be amusing to see how it develops if it’s allowed to remember my chats long term or how well it “researches” a topic. There’s a 30-day free trial I might do but ever since an audible trial I had I’ve not really trusted “free trials”. But Google isn’t as much of a shithead when it comes to payments as Amazon.
