Google hired a bunch of ex-Nuancers and have built their own speech recognition software over the past decade. I think they were licensing bits of Nuance tech earlier to plug some gaps, but they have now replaced all, or at least most, of it with homegrown stuff out of Google Labs.
Google hired a bunch of ex-Nuancers and have built their own speech recognition software over the past decade. I think they were licensing bits of Nuance tech earlier to plug some gaps, but they have now replaced all, or at least most, of it with homegrown stuff out of Google Labs.
They never even licensed any Nuance tech AFAIK (but I could possibly be mistaken so if you have a source. . .), but yes they did hire at least one former Nuance developer back in the day. That's pretty typical tho for any tech creating a new product.
Never led you wrong yet Mel. Look it up for yourself if you wish to confirm it. Try "Google licenses Nuance" for a start. You won't find a thing.
Google started with GOOG-411 (2007) to build their own library of phonemes (like Apple is now doing collecting your speech samples via Siri on their servers), and hiring Mike Cohen, formerly from Nuance, to lead the project. From there it was on. In-house engineering, strategic acquisitions, and Google-invented neural network algorithms all contribute to their current voice recognition feature.
And just to clarify while everything takes place in-house with Google owned assets and Google owned IP with employees who work for Google and not some 3rd party, some of the backbone expertise was obviously not "home-grown" but "imported" and combined with existing efforts.
I love Tesla, already put down money for the Model X and hope to get one early next year in the UK. I do so because I hope that even if (when) they go bankrupt, one of the large manufacturers will acquire their Supercharger network and I won't be left stranded with a car that I can only charge at home.
For the life of me, I cannot see how they intend to become profitable: if they lose money on the expensive cars (which, lets face it, are not very luxurious, ie the cost of materials and manufacturing is about the same as it will be for the Model III), how do they intend to make a profit on the Model III? To make money in cars, companies need to have proper scale in the premium segment (including SUVs), where they are profitable. So Tesla has to sell A LOT more Model S and X, not Model III. Small cars are just loss-leading feeders for the premium segment.
Comments
Google hired a bunch of ex-Nuancers and have built their own speech recognition software over the past decade. I think they were licensing bits of Nuance tech earlier to plug some gaps, but they have now replaced all, or at least most, of it with homegrown stuff out of Google Labs.
Google started with GOOG-411 (2007) to build their own library of phonemes (like Apple is now doing collecting your speech samples via Siri on their servers), and hiring Mike Cohen, formerly from Nuance, to lead the project. From there it was on. In-house engineering, strategic acquisitions, and Google-invented neural network algorithms all contribute to their current voice recognition feature.
And just to clarify while everything takes place in-house with Google owned assets and Google owned IP with employees who work for Google and not some 3rd party, some of the backbone expertise was obviously not "home-grown" but "imported" and combined with existing efforts.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-burns-cash-loses-more-110938456.html
Apropos of nothing, people calling for Apple to jump into the electric car business should note the following:
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/tesla-burns-cash-loses-more-110938456.html
I love Tesla, already put down money for the Model X and hope to get one early next year in the UK. I do so because I hope that even if (when) they go bankrupt, one of the large manufacturers will acquire their Supercharger network and I won't be left stranded with a car that I can only charge at home.
For the life of me, I cannot see how they intend to become profitable: if they lose money on the expensive cars (which, lets face it, are not very luxurious, ie the cost of materials and manufacturing is about the same as it will be for the Model III), how do they intend to make a profit on the Model III? To make money in cars, companies need to have proper scale in the premium segment (including SUVs), where they are profitable. So Tesla has to sell A LOT more Model S and X, not Model III. Small cars are just loss-leading feeders for the premium segment.