mattinoz

blastdoor said:

Marvin said:

Supersillyus said:

The device won't include a display

Ok it's dead then. 

People like to look at stuff. 

If you want to speak to a device you can do that to your phone or watch already. 

And you can look at images on them.

The End.

They are saying it's designed to work with other devices so it could display things on those screens. Although Jony Ive said products like Humane were poorly made, the description of their product sounds similar. One of the biggest downsides of the Humane product was waiting for cloud processing:



If it offloads processing to a local iPhone or other device or has a built-in neural chip, it would be much faster and more private but would need pretty advanced models to run on low-end hardware.

It would be useful for students and in business. A student studying could be stuck on something and would normally ask a teacher for help. The AI device would see the screen and the student can point to the issue and ask it. If it needs to display something, it can show on a phone or computer screen. If it has agent capability, it can control the screen and type things.

The same applies in business. Someone might be processing company earnings reports and need to make a presentation comparing the data. You could open the earnings reports for each year, have the camera look at it and tell it to load this data into Excel and create a graph showing the net income growth.

Someone working in Photoshop could describe actions, remove this object, lighten the photo, crop it to landscape, add a text caption with a suitable font and it can do it.

The main thing Sam Altman alluded to improving on was having to take out a computer, load up a browser, open a chat window, type in a problem and wait for a reply. They want interaction with AI to be more efficient than this and this will broaden its appeal.

They have to focus on improving things that matter to people and are common sources of inefficiency.

Definitely the smartest comment so far. 

The challenge for io/openai is that apple can easily copy this hardware. The challenge for Apple is getting their AI house in order. But if Apple can do that, then I think PCC will give them the edge.

9secondkox2 said:

A necklace isn’t exactly mass market. 

Kinda disappointed if this is what it ends up being. 

Thry did mention it would be s third device that goes on the desk after a computer and phone. 

Wouldn’t be surprised if it were a watch or even beating apple to the punch as a pair of glasses/sunglasses. 

I’m going to bet on glasses. Wouldn’t be surprised if Jony was wearing them in the preview announcement. 

Wesley_Hilliard said:

canucklehead said:

Weird for Appleinsider to do focus on the idea that it’s overpriced. Yes, it’s expensive. It may even be slightly overpriced. But considering what it does, the tech behind it, the ultra high resolution display, and the quality of the materials, I’d argue it’s priced almost appropriately.

But to draw a conclusion that the contestants guesses - contestants who clearly know nothing about the device and the tech behind it - proves it’s overpriced, is ridiculous.

I never said it was overpriced, though I did say that some people say it is. I was clear that it was expensive but that cost was warranted given the technology. So we agree.