so. i've seen you comment this on the last 4-5 videos and ignore every time i respond. so heres your last bit of attention. 1) nobody has paid for anything. 2) its in development 3) what do you believe makes it a scam? 4) i'll pin this if it makes you feel special
@@CallumUpton To be fair, you announced news "soon" on multiple occasions, and also have a dedicated youtube channel set up for it, and yet there's nothing zero zilch nada?
TED talks have become so uncountably numerous, they lost all meaning and gravitas. 10 years ago, someone giving a TED talk was a career highlight for them. Nowadays, it's no better than a youtube essay hosted on another channel.
It was never as prestigious as it purported to be. Kinda like saying "early crypto adopters weren't greedy grifters and had lofty goals of replacing gold". Nobody cares. The product is still overrated crap.
TED talks have always been a mixed bag. Some were huge and a career highlight for some but they let almost anyone on and some have been very questionable people who were given an air of authority when they really shouldn’t have been.
If the AI bros' response to asking questions is, "You just don't get it." Then the marketing sucks because how are you going to convince anyone to buy anything if they don't know what it's useful for.
@@tarwod1098 I have said it before: the only legitimate NFTs are not expected to hold their value. For example: a legitimate use-case for NFTs would be to issue concert tickets without using Ticket Master. After the concert they would all be worthless, other than sentimental value: just like paper concert tickets.
@@jamesphillips2285using your example, why do anyone would use NFT for selling ticket if a traditional database do the same thing for less energy consumption?
@@jamesphillips2285That is a valid use case for them, but even in that case the NFT part of it isn't required. Digital concert tickets can exist without them being NFTs, and even if they were NFTs you could still trade them off chain to avoid restrictions on resale value for scalping simply by just selling somebody access to the account holding the nft
I'm convinced they just wanna sell a couple devices at rich people that will wear it because it's exclusive or expensive not because it's functional, then it makes sense that this was promoted at a fashion show. Because even if it does work as intended, showing off some expensive tech device on your chest seems like carrying a "please mug and stab me sign" lol. No one would want to wear this in public.
Yea I agree this sounds like a product for ppl with to much money. It wont be the next big thing and showing a tech product on a fashion show does not feel like the right demograph to advertise this if it really was. Feels very niche and statement of wealth of the owners more then anything for me.
I like how he demonstrates the steps the AI Pin has taken to move away from a smartphone by holding the projection in smartphone stance. But yeah, the fact that the call answers in the silence that follows after he said "This is my wife" sure shows how the product isn't even actually used. That, or it's a design goal for calls to automatically answer after three rings, a deliberate function to accept call only if you say "my wife", or a terribly done performance that doesn't showcase a problem being solved let alone a competent way to solve a problem. Also sure is weird how the Pin lit up during the phone call to show functionality, but had no visual indicator when it was doing the snack bar analysis. Consistency definitely wasn't a design consideration for this product. Even if we were to assume this product is more than a pointless scam and works as advertised, how do they envision this device being used? Did they consider two users in the same room talking voice commands over each other? External sound sources triggering when a person goes outside? Is their end goal a future where buses are filled with people wearing voice-activated pocket protectors and bluetooth headphones, staring at their palms while quietly whispering over other whispering people to access their knockoff google assistant? Smaller devices isn't the same thing as usable devices, and a smartphone for ants isn't the problem most consumers want solved. Now if this person had the solution for battery capacity or lifespan, maybe this would've been more than just a meme of a TED talk.
Yeah, language models can't fit on a mobile phone due to corpus size and processing unit time via a large memory gpu, and image processors cannot do it because of the need for high end gpu as well. The girft is a grift. Probably an idea suggested by ChatGPT 3.5.
@@carlost856 I understand that. But in the background you need a beefy data center to run for multiple clients. A single PC is capable of slowly processing prompts for a single request. Things like ChatGPT (v3 or v4) require huge amount of queues and then processing. It's actually quite impressive and epic the setup that is needed.
There are smaller LLMs with much less computing power. They aren't as versatile as GPT3.5 and have a more narrow focus. We are talking 7B at most. On a Raspberry Pi its just much slower.
@@the11382 Yeah I tried to set one up not to long ago for a game I am writing. But the work needed to train was silly for a single person dev team so I went another way.
Yup. The invisible phone, the invisible keyboard. Old 3gp/mp4 files shared throughout Facebook and chat groups. Same "future" being sold through different buzzwords for over a decade.
This to me feels like a hardware solution to a problem which requires a software solution. Namely, it would be really nice to be able to do just about all possible tasks on a computer by talking to it and giving it verbal commands. This is something which for some tasks I would find nice regardless of whether I'm currently using a desktop pc, smartphone or whatever. The hardware solution to this is literally just a fucking bluetooth headset. The rest is software.
It's still a Bluetooth headset with a projector. Note how he doesn't answer the call by pressing the buttons on his hand. If not totally fake, he accepts the call with a voice command. My phone can do that already with a headset.
I was able to do this with my Sony Erricsson 18 years ago. The headset that came with it wasn't wireless, but I could just press a button and tell it who to call. Wanna know how often I used that function? Never.
@@Nerobyrne Just because accepting a call is a use-case semi-implied in the video, it's not really what I meant. I mean commands such as "open the video with cats" which should in my active browser window open the youtube video which has a title containing the word 'cats', which would be nice for mouse-less browsing while laying in bed. Similarly, responding to instant messages or having them read out while being afk. Those are situations for which I have wanted this capability in the past. Additionally, I want natural language controls which I can type in, such as "Open GIMP", "Open Image folder", "Close all redundant browser tabs", "set the current microphone as my default recording device", I don't see much use for voice commands to operate devices in your physical proximity, though. If you have natural language controls, all you'd need is speech to text (which I can already run on my computer without cloud bs) to be able to control everything with voice, so natural language controls would enable the general voice controls, too.
@@Alice_Fumo Ah ok, that makes sense. Yes, that would be very cool, but also quite a challenge. I could however see Microsoft integrating that into Cortana at some point, considering that the current versions of ChatGPT are capable of understanding humans on that level. They aren't there yet where I would trust them operating my OS, but it's certainly heading that way. I would bet actual money that MS is currently working on this, but it's going to be a few years before they have all the bugs worked out, and a few more before the community found the rest of the bugs ^^
When bluetooth started to make an appearance, I worked for the MoD. We looked at it to help with the multitudinous amount of wires that we could see happening to the infantry soldier. the concept of bluetooth was to have a set of elements working together to be your system. One would be a mobile network connector, another would be some sort of interface (say a touch screen or simply a keypad), you could have some kind of head up display like Google Glass, and of course earphones, or whatever else you wanted to interact with other personal devices. You could then upgrade each piece as new technology came out or if you broke it, without having to upgrade one big expensive item that did it all. Well never really happened did it, it all got rolled into the smartphone. But essentially what the guy is giving is that. But Callum is correct the most sensible sized screen is not a standard watch. And the optimum size for a phone or phone head set, is one that reaches from your ear to your mouth. which is why stupidly small phones never took off. The current best size is something that you can hold in one hand, and comfortably use in two.
Devil's advocate: he could have answered the phone call from his wife via audio command (presumably the contextual use of "hello?"). 95% chance you're right about it being fake, but that occurred to me as being theoretically possible.
I have a (partly) different view on this thing. 1. the premise at this point is not to make the technology smaller, but "invisible" (unnoticeable). Like an assistant that’s always around and keeps track of your activities and food consumption etc. 2. Form factor is absolutely important in technology because in theory you could do everything with a laptop or a tablet, but people prefer buying and carrying a phone. Plus certain form factors enable unique features like constant heart rate monitoring. This device could enable something like that in theory. You could ask it how many calories you ate or project building instructions on parts (for example an engine) since the camera tracks everything you do. 3. The people working on this have a great track record which is why I am excited (although I also believe the product is quite likely to fail). One of the software designers was on the original iPhone team, designing the keyboard every single smartphone uses today (so out of some brilliant engineers he was one of the best.) The founder also worked on the interface design for iPhone, iPad etc. so those people aren’t inexperienced or some fraudsters. Now, here is why I think this product will fail: 1. Price. I believe the team is too hyped and doesn’t get the price right. (Introducing the design at a fashion show is a bad sign in my opinion, because although it is important to get this device socially excepted, products introduced during fashion shows are oftentimes way too expensive.) 2. It would be the third device many people would need to buy, wear and charge. Phone is indispensable for taking photos and watching videos etc. due to the screen. Watch is indispensable for millions due to heart rate monitoring and soon probably glucose monitoring. My guess is the founders don’t acknowledge this. (They have stated the future is one without smartphones and glasses.) That’s why I believe they will price it way too high, like $999. This price would make sense if consumers wouldn’t need to buy a smartphone/tablet + watch anymore. But that’s not realistic. So imagine how much are you willing to pay for a third device, even if it is a useful device? $499 perhaps? (I believe the founders also underestimate how much people love their phone. They believe it is a burden to use one, but actually it’s a joy for many to watch videos and play games on their mobile devices.)
In 2011 I got a Sony Ericsson Xperia X10 mini pro, this was in a period when phones were getting smaller and smaller, the touch screen was so small it had to have a admittedly pretty cool flip out qwerty keyboard. After that my phones and phones in general has only got bigger to the point were we now have flip phones that are the size of a small tablet and the Note and pro phones of smartphone companies are huge.
This reminds me of a lot of smart devices which I've always thought we less convenient than doing things the coventional way, especially anything based on voice recognition when you have a non-english/american accent you just endlessly fight against them. Usually easier to press a button or type something out.
I don't understand this, Dragon Natural Speaking was able to handle accents 20 years ago. All you had to do is train it using your voice, and it would be able to understand you perfectly.
They spent a decent portion of that funding on getting it featured in a fashion show and to pay people to write articles about it. Also, unless proven otherwise, it's probably just a projector, speaker and a light that can be controlled remotely in that TED demo. My guess is they wanted something that actually has a real camera for the fashion show in case one gets stolen and that's why it's a different device.
Man this video is an amazing example of how important _charisma_ is in talks like this. He doesn't even sound like he wants to be there, why would I have any interest in what he's selling
With basically all forms of technology, porn is the first industry to inovate in a useful way. Dont follow the hustle bros. Follow porn, where the money is lol
@@ian_b I appreciate the joke lol But I more meant that deepfakes were the first place porn went with AI and now media companies are lobbying the government to be able to use AI to put any actor in any movie they want without paying.
Piercing, pulling on, causing localized sweat and blocking a patch of sun bleaching, this will only ruin clothing. And what about winter / spring with waterproof clothing that cannot be worn. Not to mention- exposing it to the elements would definitely destroy the device. As a Canadian I can say cold destroys devices QUICKLY, and when it’s ice cold and you go into a hot humid house, instantly all the precipitation covers your device, this pin will end up looking like “X years after humans” documentaries on the history channel.
The only AI part of this I can think of is that it listens to whatever you say, and then it automatically does it based on the context. Like the “AI” answered his wife based on what he said to the crowd. He’s basically pitching a mobile Amazon Echo, but an even bigger privacy nightmare.
Can you imagine being around someone else with one of these things, it's listening and analysing everything you are saying, as well as looking at everything. I can see these instantly being banned in most workplaces
At about 8:41 minutes you point out the AI Pin in the TED talk as being a thin strip (“the whole of that device”) as you refer to it in contrasting it with what Naomi Campbell is wearing in the fashion show. What you fail to realise is that in the TED talk is the AI Pin is sitting in a pocket with only the projector camera visible. You would have realised that if you’d noticed his repeated pressing of the pin’s pressure interface through his shirt in the subsequent demo of device. His talk also refers to this aspect of the interface. And it was attached to clothing in both instances of TED talk and fashion show. The “interaction” needn’t be by pressing as you suggest a few moments later - it can be by voice alone as he demonstrates seconds later.
It looks like the Pin was always that size, they just hid the bottom part of it in his jacket (you can see based on where he touches when asking the question about the chocolate bar). But yeah, basically a re-skin of a smartwatch with a low quality projector attached.
I think you're being a bit mean. The pin in his jacket was simply 'integrated'. The bulk was under the top layer of the jacket. The white one would be the universal version. This makes sense too, men generally have like 1 jacket. Women usually have more clothes, so a single device they can move to other clothes would make more sense. It's still a silly idea. It would be better if it was an earphone, where the AI would just tell you who's calling, and you could shake your head no or nod yes. If they could finally make conversational language processing, not the convoluted okay google type, that would be some good shit. Have AI understand what you want without having to learn all the commands would be invisible tech
The TED talk just looked like he had the device pinned to the inside of his shirt with that top bit poking out, which creates a problem of it's own -- having to poke holes in your wardrobe to hide your tech like the untidy bits of a pocket dog
This reminds me of the Cicret bracelet kickstarter. Just that someone removed the promise of a full screen display, kept the projector and attached it to a pre-existing smartwatch.
I have pager shifts at my job and I've taken to pinning the device on my lapel when I'm doing things outside my office so I can look down and read the pages that come on. It seems barely different from the device they're proposing here, lol. It even has similar dimensions. And this pager was designed probably before I was born
There are projection keyboards that you can click on even though its just an image like that. So those buttons *could* work. Problem is, just like with the Apple Vision Pro vs the Meta VR headsets, when you get no tactile response because you dont have a controller or physical device, the interaction is very unsatisfying. Typing on a VR keyboard is horrible compared to a physical one. Using hand gestures vs using a controller with haptics is a totally different experience. Moving the phone to projection like that doesnt actually make a better experience than having a phone.
6:23 🤔 So what you're saying is that the watch's only functionality for most (and perhaps it's only functionality at all) is basically as a pager that lets you know that there's something on the phone in your pocket? that's pretty redundant isn't it, hardly what I'd call particularly useful or a step forward, just a bit of gimmicky trash.
TED has gone down the drain over the past years, just checked and the "list price" for attending the conference next year is 12.5k and you have to apply (as in pre-screening who is allowed to listen live). Can't talk about how it was 10 years ago, but it seems to be a networking thing by now (with an advertised quota of 20% CEOs and 40% "senior leaders"). I actually wouldn't be surprised if they sell the talks now like some of the "prestigious ivy league colleges" do, where you pay a grand or two, get a 3-5 minute time slot with 50 other people, spend a day in a lecture hall, go up, blab a bit and can "honestly" say you've held a talk at X. On that product, it's about as useless as the bracelets were. What's the point of a tiny projector that projects stuff on your hand? A smart watch is just the better solution to that and even when you want to use AI in it, that's most likely at most a year or two out until the smartphone OS developers just release it as a feature, or it gets integrated in some gmail patch you can't opt out of. On the topic of phone sizes, they've been progressively getting bigger over the past years. As far as phone sizes go, we had a lot smaller phones in pre-smartphone times, and those were already getting barely usable with actual buttons before the iPhone came out. By now all the "AI" stuff is getting on my nerves to be honest. Yes it's a cool technology and maybe in 5 or 10 years when everything is puzzled out legally and it's gone beyond fancy autocorrect there might be some actual use beyond novelty. But middle management is freaking annoying, I work in the tourism sector and it takes a human about a week to wheel a decent deal out of a hotel or local agency through phonecalls (because some places only have a landline on alternating days for like 3 hours with a 9 hour time difference) and wacky balance sheets, to get an "interesting product" that can be marketed and they go "yeah, let's let an AI do it". I'm just sitting there, "guys are you even aware of what your people do on a daily basis?".
That ex apple employer has the emotional range and charisma of a red house brick. The whole AI craze is stupid, it's making the tamagotchi in the 90s look like a functional lifestyle gadget. People don't want a thousand AI devices, they just want a phone and a tablet or computer that works and have enough power to do what they want to do on them.
It's a smartwatch with a projector instead of a screen, and siri/alexa "in the cloud" I don't see the point, if they manage to get the AI part to be any good (big if) why not just use it through your phone, smartwatch or bluetooth headset connected to either of those? The dedicated device with projector part doesn't make sense to me, also what are the odds that projection will be any use at all outdoors on a pale hand? Can't imagine the battery life for a device that size with a projector bright enough to get any usable contrast in that situation would last very long.
So moores law has stalled out, the last few years have seen that theres no more way with conventional transistors to get faster or smaller for cpus. The voltage of a cpu and space can only get so small before inprobablility starts making electrons start quantum tunneling through gates
Quantum tunnelling is tight! (Sorry, couldn't NOT quote Ryan George.) Moore's law was about the number of transistors iirc, but yeah it's been quite a while since the run for more power has stalled. I remember it started when they introduced multicore CPUs because they'd reached a physical limit around 3ghz or so. I think they can go up to 5ghz now but with water cooling etc. It's been a decade or so without much evolution in pure frequency... :-/
Why not just create a bluetooth earpiece with a camera whose focal point is basically 12-16 inches in front of your face that can be accessed by the recently released Google Assistant with Bard so that these "layered" requests can be quickly handled? I use layered considering how we as humans phrase questions as compared to how our current "digital assistants" understand prompts. Up until now, our assistants, be it Google Assistant, Siri or Alexa, understand direct, single layered prompts. "Turn on the living room lights" can recognize that you want the lights associated with the living room powered on, and does it. If you were standing in the living room, without a device with presence detection in the room with you (in this case, an assistant device with a microphone that has been programmed to understand it is already in the living room has a level of presence detection) and told your phone to "turn on the lights", it would be unable to infer that you are in the living room, and would not be able to properly assist you without further prompting. It seems that Assistant with Bard (as well as this advertised device) is trying to add a second layer of context to prompts, being able to pull from your phone screen, or a worn camera, to extrapolate more information to better respond to your requests. By using image recognition and large language models, it is trying to infer your intent, so that when you ask it to turn on the lights, it can check the camera to see if it can recognize the room you're actively in, and turn on lights in reference to where you are based on items and devices it recognizes. There is value in this, as long as the execution makes sense, and I don't think Google or this guy have nailed that down yet, but I have thoughts of my own. I've been a gamer all my life, being born the year the NES was released in the United States, and having had consoles and computers in my life as far back as I remember. I was playing Doom on my uncle's PC, much younger than I likely should have, and that goes even further for my younger brother. But the important thing is that this has given me insight into the most important aspect of providing quickly accessible information to a person from a first person perspective: the HUD. The first person HUD has evolved from a chunky status bar at the bottom of the screen to a streamlined experience in modern games like Borderlands 3, Cyberpunk 2077, and the like. Modern HUDs in first person games put relevant information in the periphery of your vision (screen) so that it is available at a moment's notice without taking up the space for the most important information: what you are focused on. My vision is that if the digital assistant as it has been is phase one, and AI image processing and large language model integration represents phase two, an always-on HUD with your schedule, a minimap, a place for quick notes, and audio/visual reminders that you see in everyday life is phase three of the true digital assistant. Such a tool would be a godsend for neurodivergent people, or anyone with a busy schedule, especially if it can recognize important items in the world (phone, keys, wallet, etc.) and highlight them the same way games do, and incentivize promptness of meetings with AI generated "missions" that account for traffic conditions and help get you to where you need to be on time. I see the opportunity here, but nobody's going "big picture" enough yet for what is possible. At least with the Quest 3 and Apple's AR headset we might see some try to make this killer app, but it's currently nowhere to be seen yet.
1. When will the wearable tech people realize that all we want is to be able to talk into our wrists like Dick Tracy? 2. Can ANYONE do a TED Talk? I assumed they had some sort of checking system. Can any old idiot give one?
An headphones with a mike give you a better interaction and experience. Of curse you have far better camera on your phone already so you don't need another camera on your lapel (and also good luck go across a security check if you forgot to remove it) As a fashion gadget is ugly. Remind me of the Google Glass: they also walked them on fashion weeks, but the project war rapidly discontinued, because it was ugly and useless.
I can't take anyone that says "AI bro" unironicaly, seriously. I get "crypto bro" because the only thing that crypto and nfts do is create artificial scarcity in the digital world where that, by the most part, isn't a thing. But ai is actually usefull so i don't understand where the need to create the term "ai bro" came from.
Wow, i never realised that about smart watches, mainly because i thought smart watches were kinda dumb even before learning that since they were so small.
I kind of think we don't need more compute strength at the moment. Hardware guys have been crushing it for the last few centuries. I think its on us software folks to utilize the advances in hardware. More specialized instruction sets and more programs that take advantage of that would make more for the every day user than any shrinking or power increase ever could at this point. We are almost hitting the end of Moore's law.
I do not even like using my phone for things like ordering Pizza or writing emails because I have a PC with a mouse and a keyboard. It is infinitely more useable than a phone touch screen. Why would I go even smaller? I have no idea what this product is supposed to improve.
14:32 Genuinely thought someone made a device known as the "Sir-Clit". Which, let's all be fair, we'd probably buy one. "Now you can find anything. The Sir-Clit. Joy is just a button away."
You mentioned a bracelet. I remember ads for what looked like a thin eye piece, like the lens of one side of a pair of glasses which would display all kinds of information. That must have been at least 15-20 years ago now. So sick of people thinking technology is decades ahead of where it actually is. Not that they'd be smart enough to make good use of it anyway.
I think its also important to remember that since about 2016 or something like that, processors have not gotten much smaller. We are at a point where our current transistors are atoms thick. So making an equally powerful processor pit into a smaller space is no longer a question of when, but if (which is weird to say, since usually this goes the other way around).
in a sense, the same issue is faced by the entire energy industry, we have already found and gained full(-ish) access and control of the uses of the most energy dense substances on the planet, oil, coal and nuclear power. much like computing power can't really get any smaller, the same goes for energy storage since in terms of pure density no substance on earth outmatches oil. batteries cannot get much smaller since we would need more energy to fit into less room (which is borderline impossible is we want it somewhat safe since we already have several stucks of tnt in our pockets (with phone batteries etc) so we can only improve durability at this point, how many times can it recharge, how efficient is it in recharging etc.) i find it so baffling to see both science and tech news fall for almost impossible or irrelivant things in these fields when for both (computing power size and energy storage) we have already gone so far past diminishing returns, that shifting focus to improving other aspacts is time and money better spent
For AI specifically, we might see the rise of analog coprocessors, which could greatly speed up matrix multiplicatoons. That'll let you squeeze more processing power in a small device, but it won't be here until like a decade from now, and it won't be a fix for the current limit of NN models, which is their memory requirement
I’m baffled at the thought that people don’t understand that this device does not need to have a powerful CPU, it just connect to a server that does all the computing, one downside is your data privacy but hey chatGPT does the same thing, so does Apple and Google, so y’all already giving up your data by using these services. Also the smallest decent models are 7 Billion parameters and no smartphone is capable enough to run those yet, and it will take some time to run models like these on smartphones, either the parameter count will go down (which is the most likely thing to happen) or the mobile CPU are going to get a lot more powerful, which will take some time, we ain’t there yet, so the parameter size shrinking is a more sensible path in terms of running these models locally on your device, even then, smaller parameter models will not be as efficient in varying tasks, compared to large parameter models like chatGPT with more than 100 billion parameters, they will only serve as being great at specific tasks like coding, literature, science etc.
The future of wearables is likely in the Bluetooth headphone space, even though I hate to admit Apple was right. They can act as noise filters, hearing aids, quick access controls, recording devices, digital assistants, translators. We're at the early stages of actually useful wearables, and there will be plentiful schlock. But there will be some really nice things to come about from this.
btw The Verge has been reporting on this for awhile & have totally be clowning on how little thing is seems to do along with how cryptic the company is being on The Vergecast
The two features I miss most from my previous phones is a physical keyboard and the ability to hold it in one hand and reach the opposite side of the screen with my thumb.
Honestly one of the funniest things about the smartwatching being too small for use, reminds me of the value of my Pebble. It has no touch screen, just four buttons for control. It runs a Clock and Timer and such, but everything else is on my phone. I mostly use it to check if the notification is worth taking my phone out.
I'd really need to see how intuitive and non-clunky this thing is to use before I make a complete judgement on it. But just from this little demonstration, even if it works as advertised, I think it would be an absolute pain to use compared to the reliability of a phone. How sensitive could the camera possibly be, to determine if you're hitting the "answer call" button vs the "decline call" button? What happens if it's a rainy or foggy day? What happens if the screen gets scratched?
Seems like a product for people who carry their phone around like a waiter's tablet, with everybody in a 5m radius being able to understand every word that's being said.
Dying to see the AI bros' reaction when they learn that natural language processing/AI technology isn't actually new and has been around for 30 years now in the form of search engines, targeted advertising, recommendation systems, and customer service bots. GPT itself has been around since 2018, just not available to the public, and none of the academics and researchers that did have access to it actually thought it was going to be the future of anything, it was just a fun toy to play around with. Now that Microshaft has started mismarketing it as something that is actually useful and fit for purposes that it absolutely is not fit for, everyone and their dog is suddenly an expert on AI and apparently knows more about the subject than me, who has an actual master's degree in Computational Linguistics.
So they made a device that replaces your phone but still requires your hand... The only use I can think is to give to employees to replace work smart phones but you trading literally everything else functionality wise. And if your not replacing the phone it's purpose is people who hate watches?
It's creating a problem that doesn't exist. It literally takes a couple seconds to grab your phone. And the type of people who don't have their phone aren't the target audience. I feel like they're targeting people obsessed with the latest technology. Who else would want this?;
I bought smartwatch once just to see what's so special about it. The fact that it's worse version of my regular analog watch - which is pretty much obsolete, function wise, in this day and age - made it one do the worst money I've spend in the last 3 years.
To be fair, the device he uses might be the same as on the website, size-wise. On the interaction with the candy bar (12:58) you can see the most part of it is hidden in some pocket below the lens-and-projector part, as he even touches his jacket (and thereby the interaction-point I guess). But I agree, the use seems minimalistic and niche. Imagine a hand full of people standing in the supermarket, all of then interacting with their thingy, talking to it and getting talked to by it. Would drive me nuts.
I’d honestly sooner make my current pc more powerful with smaller tech since I think it’d be easier to use for something like a writing project. I know people write on their phones, I just prefer writing on my pc for college papers & the like. I guess what I’m trying to say, why not make what we already have run better & faster for usability
I think people forget as well that LTE watches were a thing already a decade ago. When I worked in phone sales in 2013-2014, folks that worked on power lines purchased them so they could take calls hands free without losing their hands or have earbuds in.
Honestly, as a guy into AI, you're the first I've heard of this. And I haven't seen it even mentioned on r/Singularity, r/LLama, or r/Artificial_Intelligence. I don't know if AI people are really as hyped about this as you suggest, and as a guy who follows AI, I'm not interested in it at all.
small form factors have a lot of issues. heat, power and signal are the obvious limitations. i'm actually surprised that a mobile OS hasn't made a version yet where once you dock your phone to a screen/input it gives you a full desktop experience.
Ubuntu touch tried to do it with convergence in i think 2016 and failed, because app ecosystem wasnt as good as in android at that time. Still ubuntu touch was quite cool. And also samsung devices has this with dex. You connect phone to usb-c monitor and you can use it as a pc. Dex concept reminds me of i think 2017 when some company (dont remember how exactly it was called but i tried that OS) tried to port android to desktop pc's.
@@illuvialpink couldn't agree more. at the time i had bought a phone specifically because of it's ubuntu touch support. wasn't aware samsung had tried it though i dislike their andoid fork, though that's a different conversation. i just feel Google is missing an easy shot by not mashing chromebook/android together.
@@def_NaN sadly google became like apple, waits for other vendors to innovate and if they succeed, only then they implement it. Good example is foldable pixel. I'm iOS dev, but apple's nose picking and waiting for god knows what is killing me, meanwhile google picked their nose for 4 generations of foldables. Same thing i expect that they will wait for samsung dex to exceed, but until then, they wont be implementing something similar.
It makes me think of the episode of The Orville, where everyone had pins that represented their social rating. Everyone could rate each other in person. If their rating is high, you were essentially infallible. If it's low, they went to jail (or worse)! Something like that on the fashion runway would be hilariously appropriate. 😅
As a concept, it is arguably cool. Though in function it is little different to a smartwatch, which isn't unnecessary but also not as useful as they are made out to be.
I'm going to be honest the pin is totally useless even for those with disabilities. As you said it'll flap around on clothing, if I want to use that whole food or read label thing why not have it on my head. I don't know maybe mounted into my glasses so that it sees what I see. Or if I have a mobility issue it should be on my arm to make it both accessible to First Responders or my Friends and Family.
I think some of the top end watches nowadays can actually do a lot more on the phone hardware. You can attach an e-sim to it and use data. The highest end applewatch can do things like play music, take calls, send messages ect all directly on the hardware
10:33 - And if it is cut out and you do have to touch your hand, it's one more limb needed versus the phone or watch as they can both be answered using voice - Showing buttons on his hand, suggests being able to touch. I think you're right, this is all very vague to sell something to people with more money than sense that like to be the first to own something on the back of buzz-words.
Hi Callum, thanks for the review. I agree with your comments. I work with disabilities and low-income families. Many of the kids in these families use their phones to do homework, receive tutoring, tele-meds appointments; as well as shop or pay bills, because they don't have a computer. Many of us who are economically fortunate don't always realize there is still a large population of people we come into contact with daily, living paycheck to paycheck. This type of product may look good on paper, but as you have stated, it's not functional for daily use, and definitely not useable for families who need and use their phone/ phone screen to complete hundreds of daily tasks that require visually reviewing data and information. I'm not saying this can't be a good investment, but it's definitely going to be considered a luxury or novelty item vs a resource or productivity tool.
I watched the TED Talk previously and I didn't even think about the computational horsepower an AI model would need. My work laptop can't run a decent Speech-to-text model so I don't expect this little thing to be able to.
What he said in the TED talk and you backed him up on about computer power getting higher whilst also getting smaller is not exactly true! Yes, the computing devices shown on the screen as he said it do go up in power while shrinking in size, well, except for the phone to watch as that watch will have less computing power than a phone released at the same time. But look at more powerful desktop computers. They are just as big now, if not bigger, as they were in the late 90's and are way more powerful than the phones and 'smart' watches. We can get powerful CPUs into smaller packages but the most power still comes from the larger machines.
I didn't even make it 10 minutes into the video before having to write a comment. "AR is not the way, they're just moving the screens :)" >proceeds to change the screen into a projector and calls it innovative How many 'prototype' phones did we see previewed in the 2000s that had weird projector keyboards and how many times did we realize it's a terrible idea? And how many of those actually came out?
I love how all these amgic devices fail the click test. Bascally the click test is a way to know if your upgrade is actually an upgrade or just flashy overcomplication of an already stablished system by counting how many clicks or steps it takes you to complete the same task in the newer version against the older version. And in this you can tell that at minimun the clicks remai the same. Starting from that you'd have to raise your hand to face level, and interact in the palm of your hand, you know just as you would with a simple phone. Then unless that thing has like the absolute best AI driven speakers adn phone in order to isolate any external noise and boost the sgnal directing your voice to the mic and the speaker sounds to your ears, you'd still need to sync blutooth earphones to it and wear them. Then unless they either solve the entropy conundrum and give this thing unlimited energy or pretend to have an incredibly large and wastefull wireless charging infrastructure, you'd still ahve to plug that thing at the end of the day. So basically is just a phone with less features and accesibility, WHICH BTW what about people with different capabilities, what if you dont ahve a hand, what if you are mute? anyway, this thing does nothing an iphone with siri can do, and the things it does it does way worse.
A 'smart watch' is an external monitor for your phone, plus a bluetooth peripheral with some sensors. That's why I don't bother with 'em. My phone already does all of it. The small convenience of flipping my wrist over instead of touching my phone on its charging stand isn't worth several hundred $ more.
I don't think people understand the whole point of this is so that you do no have to open "apps" to do simple daily tasks. That is the simplicity of it. It works how it should be, natural and screen-less. Besides, I think in the TED talk he has the device hidden in a pocket, only the top part is visible, it very much is the same device.
Last I looked. Many smart watches rely on your phone to do pretty much all of the computing. the watch itself doesn't and can't do it. That's why they put other little devices like tracking your heart beat and things like that into it. it's because the watch isn't really doing the work. It's just giving you another access point to your phone.
Having a projector in a public space gives no privacy! I can't believe thos is a main TED talk, not a TEDX talk that anybody who can do. TED talks are usually inspiring, thought-provoking and add value. This is just a sales pitch. I would definitely forget to take it off a shirt and put it through the washing machine.
Aren't there projector keyboards that are used in a similar way? All I hear from them is how much of a pain they are to use. I think the concept of the pin is nifty, but it's a novelty at best as presented. There isn't a single function shown that really grabs my attention.
Projector keyboards have an important advantage: they're placed at a near 90° angle to your hands. The way he's using this, his right hand would be blocking all view from the wearable if he tried to press the button being projected. Hell, he'd block the projector.
It's about bypassing privacy laws and getting access to customer information companies like Apple and Google don't want to give, so new hardware allows for a new service and contract, not given to developers.
I dont think this has uses even for disabled people. For example, in the area of acessories for visually impaired, it is much better to just use a normal smartphone with an app. (and probably cheaper too). If you want the text-to-speech capability (which in this area existed literally for decades), you just get a small headphone on one of your ears and connect it with your phone through Bluetooth. This also prevents from everyone around you hearing your search results for your connecting bus for example, which would just be annoying to people around you (constantly hearing the app/device reading everything on the screen) and wouldnt tell everyone with potentionally nefarious goals exactly where and what time you will be. I literally cant think of any single use cases for this device (which wont be cheap at all Im sure).
what about nightmare world?? also a scam??
so. i've seen you comment this on the last 4-5 videos and ignore every time i respond. so heres your last bit of attention.
1) nobody has paid for anything.
2) its in development
3) what do you believe makes it a scam?
4) i'll pin this if it makes you feel special
+1 Attention Points
no
@@CallumUpton you'll AI pin it*
@@CallumUpton To be fair, you announced news "soon" on multiple occasions, and also have a dedicated youtube channel set up for it, and yet there's nothing zero zilch nada?
TED talks have become so uncountably numerous, they lost all meaning and gravitas.
10 years ago, someone giving a TED talk was a career highlight for them. Nowadays, it's no better than a youtube essay hosted on another channel.
Word
And a safe haven for pedophiles to justify their actions (TED talks about MAPS)
It was never as prestigious as it purported to be. Kinda like saying "early crypto adopters weren't greedy grifters and had lofty goals of replacing gold". Nobody cares. The product is still overrated crap.
TED talks have always been a mixed bag. Some were huge and a career highlight for some but they let almost anyone on and some have been very questionable people who were given an air of authority when they really shouldn’t have been.
Ted was ded as soon as someone started a speech with "I have a folder on my desktop labelled 'death threats'"
If the AI bros' response to asking questions is, "You just don't get it." Then the marketing sucks because how are you going to convince anyone to buy anything if they don't know what it's useful for.
Same thing the Crypto bro‘s said about NFTs 😅
"You just don’t get it" usually means that person doesn't themself understand it...
@@tarwod1098 I have said it before: the only legitimate NFTs are not expected to hold their value.
For example: a legitimate use-case for NFTs would be to issue concert tickets without using Ticket Master. After the concert they would all be worthless, other than sentimental value: just like paper concert tickets.
@@jamesphillips2285using your example, why do anyone would use NFT for selling ticket if a traditional database do the same thing for less energy consumption?
@@jamesphillips2285That is a valid use case for them, but even in that case the NFT part of it isn't required. Digital concert tickets can exist without them being NFTs, and even if they were NFTs you could still trade them off chain to avoid restrictions on resale value for scalping simply by just selling somebody access to the account holding the nft
I'm convinced they just wanna sell a couple devices at rich people that will wear it because it's exclusive or expensive not because it's functional, then it makes sense that this was promoted at a fashion show. Because even if it does work as intended, showing off some expensive tech device on your chest seems like carrying a "please mug and stab me sign" lol. No one would want to wear this in public.
Well, maybe dumb influencers would.
Yea I agree this sounds like a product for ppl with to much money. It wont be the next big thing and showing a tech product on a fashion show does not feel like the right demograph to advertise this if it really was. Feels very niche and statement of wealth of the owners more then anything for me.
You'd be surprised? Especially if mugging isn't really an issue you deal with or worry about.
Seriously the NPCs around to day would surprise you
So it's like a pager? getting rid of the screen to....also get rid of functionality. Totally the future!
I like how he demonstrates the steps the AI Pin has taken to move away from a smartphone by holding the projection in smartphone stance. But yeah, the fact that the call answers in the silence that follows after he said "This is my wife" sure shows how the product isn't even actually used. That, or it's a design goal for calls to automatically answer after three rings, a deliberate function to accept call only if you say "my wife", or a terribly done performance that doesn't showcase a problem being solved let alone a competent way to solve a problem.
Also sure is weird how the Pin lit up during the phone call to show functionality, but had no visual indicator when it was doing the snack bar analysis. Consistency definitely wasn't a design consideration for this product.
Even if we were to assume this product is more than a pointless scam and works as advertised, how do they envision this device being used? Did they consider two users in the same room talking voice commands over each other? External sound sources triggering when a person goes outside? Is their end goal a future where buses are filled with people wearing voice-activated pocket protectors and bluetooth headphones, staring at their palms while quietly whispering over other whispering people to access their knockoff google assistant?
Smaller devices isn't the same thing as usable devices, and a smartphone for ants isn't the problem most consumers want solved. Now if this person had the solution for battery capacity or lifespan, maybe this would've been more than just a meme of a TED talk.
the privacy nightmare when it projects the rancy text you just got onto the wall in front of everyone
Yeah, language models can't fit on a mobile phone due to corpus size and processing unit time via a large memory gpu, and image processors cannot do it because of the need for high end gpu as well. The girft is a grift. Probably an idea suggested by ChatGPT 3.5.
It's run on someone's else computer like most of these AI gimmicks. The client can run on a headset. It doesn't need much.
@@carlost856 I understand that. But in the background you need a beefy data center to run for multiple clients. A single PC is capable of slowly processing prompts for a single request. Things like ChatGPT (v3 or v4) require huge amount of queues and then processing. It's actually quite impressive and epic the setup that is needed.
There are smaller LLMs with much less computing power. They aren't as versatile as GPT3.5 and have a more narrow focus. We are talking 7B at most. On a Raspberry Pi its just much slower.
@@TheGrimGary that's what I said, they run on someone else's computer.
@@the11382 Yeah I tried to set one up not to long ago for a game I am writing. But the work needed to train was silly for a single person dev team so I went another way.
Oh it's a stupid projector thing again... like that bracelet that was total hype years ago.
I still feel like that could be a good idea, but we are no way there yet
Yup. The invisible phone, the invisible keyboard. Old 3gp/mp4 files shared throughout Facebook and chat groups. Same "future" being sold through different buzzwords for over a decade.
Oh they should make this thing project nft's 😂
Projectors don't work in daylight, and tacking motion interaction is extremely finicky. It's an awful idea.
@@hop-skip-ouch8798god I remember all those invisible phone concepts. Especially after Graphene blew up in popularity.
This to me feels like a hardware solution to a problem which requires a software solution.
Namely, it would be really nice to be able to do just about all possible tasks on a computer by talking to it and giving it verbal commands. This is something which for some tasks I would find nice regardless of whether I'm currently using a desktop pc, smartphone or whatever.
The hardware solution to this is literally just a fucking bluetooth headset. The rest is software.
It's still a Bluetooth headset with a projector. Note how he doesn't answer the call by pressing the buttons on his hand. If not totally fake, he accepts the call with a voice command. My phone can do that already with a headset.
I was able to do this with my Sony Erricsson 18 years ago.
The headset that came with it wasn't wireless, but I could just press a button and tell it who to call.
Wanna know how often I used that function?
Never.
@@Nerobyrne Just because accepting a call is a use-case semi-implied in the video, it's not really what I meant.
I mean commands such as "open the video with cats" which should in my active browser window open the youtube video which has a title containing the word 'cats', which would be nice for mouse-less browsing while laying in bed. Similarly, responding to instant messages or having them read out while being afk.
Those are situations for which I have wanted this capability in the past.
Additionally, I want natural language controls which I can type in, such as "Open GIMP", "Open Image folder", "Close all redundant browser tabs", "set the current microphone as my default recording device",
I don't see much use for voice commands to operate devices in your physical proximity, though. If you have natural language controls, all you'd need is speech to text (which I can already run on my computer without cloud bs) to be able to control everything with voice, so natural language controls would enable the general voice controls, too.
@@Alice_Fumo
Ah ok, that makes sense.
Yes, that would be very cool, but also quite a challenge. I could however see Microsoft integrating that into Cortana at some point, considering that the current versions of ChatGPT are capable of understanding humans on that level.
They aren't there yet where I would trust them operating my OS, but it's certainly heading that way. I would bet actual money that MS is currently working on this, but it's going to be a few years before they have all the bugs worked out, and a few more before the community found the rest of the bugs ^^
@@Alice_Fumo Sounds like you want more gimmicky crap tho. Or stuff that takes literally seconds to type into the search bar
Ima be real, if you told me this presentation was AI generated id have believed you
Best comment.
There are already things I don't do on my phone because its too small and frustrating, I can't imagine a pin
My guess is you'll still need a phone and this is a glorified Bluetooth headset. Or just vaporware.
its not suppose to replace your phone, its something entirely different. they want to create a new way of human computer interaction
When bluetooth started to make an appearance, I worked for the MoD. We looked at it to help with the multitudinous amount of wires that we could see happening to the infantry soldier. the concept of bluetooth was to have a set of elements working together to be your system. One would be a mobile network connector, another would be some sort of interface (say a touch screen or simply a keypad), you could have some kind of head up display like Google Glass, and of course earphones, or whatever else you wanted to interact with other personal devices. You could then upgrade each piece as new technology came out or if you broke it, without having to upgrade one big expensive item that did it all. Well never really happened did it, it all got rolled into the smartphone. But essentially what the guy is giving is that.
But Callum is correct the most sensible sized screen is not a standard watch. And the optimum size for a phone or phone head set, is one that reaches from your ear to your mouth. which is why stupidly small phones never took off.
The current best size is something that you can hold in one hand, and comfortably use in two.
This certainly comes across as someone who believes their device will change the world, and won't understand why it fails when it falls flat.
Devil's advocate: he could have answered the phone call from his wife via audio command (presumably the contextual use of "hello?"). 95% chance you're right about it being fake, but that occurred to me as being theoretically possible.
I have a (partly) different view on this thing.
1. the premise at this point is not to make the technology smaller, but "invisible" (unnoticeable). Like an assistant that’s always around and keeps track of your activities and food consumption etc.
2. Form factor is absolutely important in technology because in theory you could do everything with a laptop or a tablet, but people prefer buying and carrying a phone. Plus certain form factors enable unique features like constant heart rate monitoring. This device could enable something like that in theory. You could ask it how many calories you ate or project building instructions on parts (for example an engine) since the camera tracks everything you do.
3. The people working on this have a great track record which is why I am excited (although I also believe the product is quite likely to fail). One of the software designers was on the original iPhone team, designing the keyboard every single smartphone uses today (so out of some brilliant engineers he was one of the best.) The founder also worked on the interface design for iPhone, iPad etc. so those people aren’t inexperienced or some fraudsters.
Now, here is why I think this product will fail: 1. Price. I believe the team is too hyped and doesn’t get the price right. (Introducing the design at a fashion show is a bad sign in my opinion, because although it is important to get this device socially excepted, products introduced during fashion shows are oftentimes way too expensive.)
2. It would be the third device many people would need to buy, wear and charge. Phone is indispensable for taking photos and watching videos etc. due to the screen. Watch is indispensable for millions due to heart rate monitoring and soon probably glucose monitoring.
My guess is the founders don’t acknowledge this. (They have stated the future is one without smartphones and glasses.) That’s why I believe they will price it way too high, like $999. This price would make sense if consumers wouldn’t need to buy a smartphone/tablet + watch anymore. But that’s not realistic. So imagine how much are you willing to pay for a third device, even if it is a useful device? $499 perhaps? (I believe the founders also underestimate how much people love their phone. They believe it is a burden to use one, but actually it’s a joy for many to watch videos and play games on their mobile devices.)
Does anyone remember the Zoolander joke where the trendy male models used phones so small they could barely use them?
Thanks for all the vids you do, finally have some spare change to put your way, hope Nightmare World development is going good!
thankyou so much! its chugging along as always! XD
In 2011 I got a Sony Ericsson Xperia X10 mini pro, this was in a period when phones were getting smaller and smaller, the touch screen was so small it had to have a admittedly pretty cool flip out qwerty keyboard. After that my phones and phones in general has only got bigger to the point were we now have flip phones that are the size of a small tablet and the Note and pro phones of smartphone companies are huge.
i remember having that phone, it was amazing!
I miss it. Along with a smallish 7in tablet for media consumption I think it was the perfect form factor.
8:10 *looks at hand* "This is my wife."
That's rough, buddy...
lmao, good one
This reminds me of a lot of smart devices which I've always thought we less convenient than doing things the coventional way, especially anything based on voice recognition when you have a non-english/american accent you just endlessly fight against them. Usually easier to press a button or type something out.
I don't understand this, Dragon Natural Speaking was able to handle accents 20 years ago.
All you had to do is train it using your voice, and it would be able to understand you perfectly.
@Nerobyrne
But why would I want to train it using my voice? Unless I m disabled I would prefer just typing things down
@@angelikaskoroszyn8495 Exactly, you only get conveinience after wasting a bunch of time is the opposite of being useful?
@@Nerathul1no.
They spent a decent portion of that funding on getting it featured in a fashion show and to pay people to write articles about it. Also, unless proven otherwise, it's probably just a projector, speaker and a light that can be controlled remotely in that TED demo. My guess is they wanted something that actually has a real camera for the fashion show in case one gets stolen and that's why it's a different device.
Man this video is an amazing example of how important _charisma_ is in talks like this. He doesn't even sound like he wants to be there, why would I have any interest in what he's selling
Comes from the Elon Musk school of antipromotion and terrible salesmanship.
With basically all forms of technology, porn is the first industry to inovate in a useful way. Dont follow the hustle bros. Follow porn, where the money is lol
So the porn gets projected onto one hand, and with the other hand...?
@@ian_b I appreciate the joke lol
But I more meant that deepfakes were the first place porn went with AI and now media companies are lobbying the government to be able to use AI to put any actor in any movie they want without paying.
Piercing, pulling on, causing localized sweat and blocking a patch of sun bleaching, this will only ruin clothing. And what about winter / spring with waterproof clothing that cannot be worn. Not to mention- exposing it to the elements would definitely destroy the device. As a Canadian I can say cold destroys devices QUICKLY, and when it’s ice cold and you go into a hot humid house, instantly all the precipitation covers your device, this pin will end up looking like “X years after humans” documentaries on the history channel.
The only AI part of this I can think of is that it listens to whatever you say, and then it automatically does it based on the context. Like the “AI” answered his wife based on what he said to the crowd.
He’s basically pitching a mobile Amazon Echo, but an even bigger privacy nightmare.
Can you imagine being around someone else with one of these things, it's listening and analysing everything you are saying, as well as looking at everything. I can see these instantly being banned in most workplaces
@@tedferkinit's like those people freaking out at people wearing google glasses back in the day. Which this is just that with an even worse display.
At about 8:41 minutes you point out the AI Pin in the TED talk as being a thin strip (“the whole of that device”) as you refer to it in contrasting it with what Naomi Campbell is wearing in the fashion show. What you fail to realise is that in the TED talk is the AI Pin is sitting in a pocket with only the projector camera visible.
You would have realised that if you’d noticed his repeated pressing of the pin’s pressure interface through his shirt in the subsequent demo of device. His talk also refers to this aspect of the interface.
And it was attached to clothing in both instances of TED talk and fashion show.
The “interaction” needn’t be by pressing as you suggest a few moments later - it can be by voice alone as he demonstrates seconds later.
It looks like the Pin was always that size, they just hid the bottom part of it in his jacket (you can see based on where he touches when asking the question about the chocolate bar). But yeah, basically a re-skin of a smartwatch with a low quality projector attached.
I think you're being a bit mean. The pin in his jacket was simply 'integrated'. The bulk was under the top layer of the jacket. The white one would be the universal version. This makes sense too, men generally have like 1 jacket. Women usually have more clothes, so a single device they can move to other clothes would make more sense.
It's still a silly idea. It would be better if it was an earphone, where the AI would just tell you who's calling, and you could shake your head no or nod yes. If they could finally make conversational language processing, not the convoluted okay google type, that would be some good shit. Have AI understand what you want without having to learn all the commands would be invisible tech
The TED talk just looked like he had the device pinned to the inside of his shirt with that top bit poking out, which creates a problem of it's own -- having to poke holes in your wardrobe to hide your tech like the untidy bits of a pocket dog
This reminds me of the Cicret bracelet kickstarter. Just that someone removed the promise of a full screen display, kept the projector and attached it to a pre-existing smartwatch.
If you watched the whole video before commenting, callum said this exact thing.
Imagine buying that and it doesn't understand your accent
This is so funny, like, what is the actual difference between projecting a phone screen on your hand and holding your phone with it??? lmaoo
I have pager shifts at my job and I've taken to pinning the device on my lapel when I'm doing things outside my office so I can look down and read the pages that come on. It seems barely different from the device they're proposing here, lol. It even has similar dimensions. And this pager was designed probably before I was born
Love the fact you follow ppl for content, we love to see what new 'genius' ideas those guys will come up with next :D
There are projection keyboards that you can click on even though its just an image like that. So those buttons *could* work. Problem is, just like with the Apple Vision Pro vs the Meta VR headsets, when you get no tactile response because you dont have a controller or physical device, the interaction is very unsatisfying. Typing on a VR keyboard is horrible compared to a physical one. Using hand gestures vs using a controller with haptics is a totally different experience. Moving the phone to projection like that doesnt actually make a better experience than having a phone.
All devices were getting smaller till someone realized you can watch pron on them and now they're getting bigger again :D
They call it “AI” so the former dumb NFT bros, now AI bros, buy into it blindfolded.
6:23 🤔 So what you're saying is that the watch's only functionality for most (and perhaps it's only functionality at all) is basically as a pager that lets you know that there's something on the phone in your pocket? that's pretty redundant isn't it, hardly what I'd call particularly useful or a step forward, just a bit of gimmicky trash.
TED has gone down the drain over the past years, just checked and the "list price" for attending the conference next year is 12.5k and you have to apply (as in pre-screening who is allowed to listen live). Can't talk about how it was 10 years ago, but it seems to be a networking thing by now (with an advertised quota of 20% CEOs and 40% "senior leaders"). I actually wouldn't be surprised if they sell the talks now like some of the "prestigious ivy league colleges" do, where you pay a grand or two, get a 3-5 minute time slot with 50 other people, spend a day in a lecture hall, go up, blab a bit and can "honestly" say you've held a talk at X.
On that product, it's about as useless as the bracelets were. What's the point of a tiny projector that projects stuff on your hand? A smart watch is just the better solution to that and even when you want to use AI in it, that's most likely at most a year or two out until the smartphone OS developers just release it as a feature, or it gets integrated in some gmail patch you can't opt out of. On the topic of phone sizes, they've been progressively getting bigger over the past years. As far as phone sizes go, we had a lot smaller phones in pre-smartphone times, and those were already getting barely usable with actual buttons before the iPhone came out.
By now all the "AI" stuff is getting on my nerves to be honest. Yes it's a cool technology and maybe in 5 or 10 years when everything is puzzled out legally and it's gone beyond fancy autocorrect there might be some actual use beyond novelty. But middle management is freaking annoying, I work in the tourism sector and it takes a human about a week to wheel a decent deal out of a hotel or local agency through phonecalls (because some places only have a landline on alternating days for like 3 hours with a 9 hour time difference) and wacky balance sheets, to get an "interesting product" that can be marketed and they go "yeah, let's let an AI do it". I'm just sitting there, "guys are you even aware of what your people do on a daily basis?".
That ex apple employer has the emotional range and charisma of a red house brick.
The whole AI craze is stupid, it's making the tamagotchi in the 90s look like a functional lifestyle gadget.
People don't want a thousand AI devices, they just want a phone and a tablet or computer that works and have enough power to do what they want to do on them.
When you order a Bond Villain from Wish.
It's a smartwatch with a projector instead of a screen, and siri/alexa "in the cloud" I don't see the point, if they manage to get the AI part to be any good (big if) why not just use it through your phone, smartwatch or bluetooth headset connected to either of those? The dedicated device with projector part doesn't make sense to me, also what are the odds that projection will be any use at all outdoors on a pale hand? Can't imagine the battery life for a device that size with a projector bright enough to get any usable contrast in that situation would last very long.
So moores law has stalled out, the last few years have seen that theres no more way with conventional transistors to get faster or smaller for cpus. The voltage of a cpu and space can only get so small before inprobablility starts making electrons start quantum tunneling through gates
Quantum tunnelling is tight!
(Sorry, couldn't NOT quote Ryan George.)
Moore's law was about the number of transistors iirc, but yeah it's been quite a while since the run for more power has stalled. I remember it started when they introduced multicore CPUs because they'd reached a physical limit around 3ghz or so. I think they can go up to 5ghz now but with water cooling etc. It's been a decade or so without much evolution in pure frequency... :-/
Why not just create a bluetooth earpiece with a camera whose focal point is basically 12-16 inches in front of your face that can be accessed by the recently released Google Assistant with Bard so that these "layered" requests can be quickly handled?
I use layered considering how we as humans phrase questions as compared to how our current "digital assistants" understand prompts. Up until now, our assistants, be it Google Assistant, Siri or Alexa, understand direct, single layered prompts. "Turn on the living room lights" can recognize that you want the lights associated with the living room powered on, and does it. If you were standing in the living room, without a device with presence detection in the room with you (in this case, an assistant device with a microphone that has been programmed to understand it is already in the living room has a level of presence detection) and told your phone to "turn on the lights", it would be unable to infer that you are in the living room, and would not be able to properly assist you without further prompting.
It seems that Assistant with Bard (as well as this advertised device) is trying to add a second layer of context to prompts, being able to pull from your phone screen, or a worn camera, to extrapolate more information to better respond to your requests. By using image recognition and large language models, it is trying to infer your intent, so that when you ask it to turn on the lights, it can check the camera to see if it can recognize the room you're actively in, and turn on lights in reference to where you are based on items and devices it recognizes. There is value in this, as long as the execution makes sense, and I don't think Google or this guy have nailed that down yet, but I have thoughts of my own.
I've been a gamer all my life, being born the year the NES was released in the United States, and having had consoles and computers in my life as far back as I remember. I was playing Doom on my uncle's PC, much younger than I likely should have, and that goes even further for my younger brother. But the important thing is that this has given me insight into the most important aspect of providing quickly accessible information to a person from a first person perspective: the HUD.
The first person HUD has evolved from a chunky status bar at the bottom of the screen to a streamlined experience in modern games like Borderlands 3, Cyberpunk 2077, and the like. Modern HUDs in first person games put relevant information in the periphery of your vision (screen) so that it is available at a moment's notice without taking up the space for the most important information: what you are focused on.
My vision is that if the digital assistant as it has been is phase one, and AI image processing and large language model integration represents phase two, an always-on HUD with your schedule, a minimap, a place for quick notes, and audio/visual reminders that you see in everyday life is phase three of the true digital assistant. Such a tool would be a godsend for neurodivergent people, or anyone with a busy schedule, especially if it can recognize important items in the world (phone, keys, wallet, etc.) and highlight them the same way games do, and incentivize promptness of meetings with AI generated "missions" that account for traffic conditions and help get you to where you need to be on time. I see the opportunity here, but nobody's going "big picture" enough yet for what is possible. At least with the Quest 3 and Apple's AR headset we might see some try to make this killer app, but it's currently nowhere to be seen yet.
1. When will the wearable tech people realize that all we want is to be able to talk into our wrists like Dick Tracy?
2. Can ANYONE do a TED Talk? I assumed they had some sort of checking system. Can any old idiot give one?
An headphones with a mike give you a better interaction and experience. Of curse you have far better camera on your phone already so you don't need another camera on your lapel (and also good luck go across a security check if you forgot to remove it)
As a fashion gadget is ugly.
Remind me of the Google Glass: they also walked them on fashion weeks, but the project war rapidly discontinued, because it was ugly and useless.
I can't take anyone that says "AI bro" unironicaly, seriously. I get "crypto bro" because the only thing that crypto and nfts do is create artificial scarcity in the digital world where that, by the most part, isn't a thing. But ai is actually usefull so i don't understand where the need to create the term "ai bro" came from.
Wow, i never realised that about smart watches, mainly because i thought smart watches were kinda dumb even before learning that since they were so small.
When I first saw it I thought someone had stuck a portable card reader to their jacket
I kind of think we don't need more compute strength at the moment.
Hardware guys have been crushing it for the last few centuries.
I think its on us software folks to utilize the advances in hardware.
More specialized instruction sets and more programs that take advantage of that would make more for the every day user than any shrinking or power increase ever could at this point.
We are almost hitting the end of Moore's law.
I do not even like using my phone for things like ordering Pizza or writing emails because I have a PC with a mouse and a keyboard. It is infinitely more useable than a phone touch screen. Why would I go even smaller? I have no idea what this product is supposed to improve.
see you on november 9th
I don't think I need a computer/phone that I could accidently swallow.
14:32 Genuinely thought someone made a device known as the "Sir-Clit". Which, let's all be fair, we'd probably buy one. "Now you can find anything. The Sir-Clit. Joy is just a button away."
You mentioned a bracelet. I remember ads for what looked like a thin eye piece, like the lens of one side of a pair of glasses which would display all kinds of information. That must have been at least 15-20 years ago now.
So sick of people thinking technology is decades ahead of where it actually is. Not that they'd be smart enough to make good use of it anyway.
I think its also important to remember that since about 2016 or something like that, processors have not gotten much smaller. We are at a point where our current transistors are atoms thick. So making an equally powerful processor pit into a smaller space is no longer a question of when, but if (which is weird to say, since usually this goes the other way around).
in a sense, the same issue is faced by the entire energy industry, we have already found and gained full(-ish) access and control of the uses of the most energy dense substances on the planet, oil, coal and nuclear power. much like computing power can't really get any smaller, the same goes for energy storage since in terms of pure density no substance on earth outmatches oil. batteries cannot get much smaller since we would need more energy to fit into less room (which is borderline impossible is we want it somewhat safe since we already have several stucks of tnt in our pockets (with phone batteries etc) so we can only improve durability at this point, how many times can it recharge, how efficient is it in recharging etc.) i find it so baffling to see both science and tech news fall for almost impossible or irrelivant things in these fields when for both (computing power size and energy storage) we have already gone so far past diminishing returns, that shifting focus to improving other aspacts is time and money better spent
For AI specifically, we might see the rise of analog coprocessors, which could greatly speed up matrix multiplicatoons. That'll let you squeeze more processing power in a small device, but it won't be here until like a decade from now, and it won't be a fix for the current limit of NN models, which is their memory requirement
I’m baffled at the thought that people don’t understand that this device does not need to have a powerful CPU, it just connect to a server that does all the computing, one downside is your data privacy but hey chatGPT does the same thing, so does Apple and Google, so y’all already giving up your data by using these services. Also the smallest decent models are 7 Billion parameters and no smartphone is capable enough to run those yet, and it will take some time to run models like these on smartphones, either the parameter count will go down (which is the most likely thing to happen) or the mobile CPU are going to get a lot more powerful, which will take some time, we ain’t there yet, so the parameter size shrinking is a more sensible path in terms of running these models locally on your device, even then, smaller parameter models will not be as efficient in varying tasks, compared to large parameter models like chatGPT with more than 100 billion parameters, they will only serve as being great at specific tasks like coding, literature, science etc.
The future is having everything that runs on your phone in your pocket running on some AWS server you pay a middleman to use monthly I guess.
The future of wearables is likely in the Bluetooth headphone space, even though I hate to admit Apple was right. They can act as noise filters, hearing aids, quick access controls, recording devices, digital assistants, translators.
We're at the early stages of actually useful wearables, and there will be plentiful schlock. But there will be some really nice things to come about from this.
btw The Verge has been reporting on this for awhile & have totally be clowning on how little thing is seems to do along with how cryptic the company is being on The Vergecast
The two features I miss most from my previous phones is a physical keyboard and the ability to hold it in one hand and reach the opposite side of the screen with my thumb.
Honestly one of the funniest things about the smartwatching being too small for use, reminds me of the value of my Pebble. It has no touch screen, just four buttons for control. It runs a Clock and Timer and such, but everything else is on my phone. I mostly use it to check if the notification is worth taking my phone out.
The issue is that people have started to believe that narrative + money = innovation. People forgot that narratives can also be lies.
I'd really need to see how intuitive and non-clunky this thing is to use before I make a complete judgement on it. But just from this little demonstration, even if it works as advertised, I think it would be an absolute pain to use compared to the reliability of a phone. How sensitive could the camera possibly be, to determine if you're hitting the "answer call" button vs the "decline call" button? What happens if it's a rainy or foggy day? What happens if the screen gets scratched?
Seems like a product for people who carry their phone around like a waiter's tablet, with everybody in a 5m radius being able to understand every word that's being said.
Dying to see the AI bros' reaction when they learn that natural language processing/AI technology isn't actually new and has been around for 30 years now in the form of search engines, targeted advertising, recommendation systems, and customer service bots. GPT itself has been around since 2018, just not available to the public, and none of the academics and researchers that did have access to it actually thought it was going to be the future of anything, it was just a fun toy to play around with. Now that Microshaft has started mismarketing it as something that is actually useful and fit for purposes that it absolutely is not fit for, everyone and their dog is suddenly an expert on AI and apparently knows more about the subject than me, who has an actual master's degree in Computational Linguistics.
So they made a device that replaces your phone but still requires your hand... The only use I can think is to give to employees to replace work smart phones but you trading literally everything else functionality wise. And if your not replacing the phone it's purpose is people who hate watches?
It's creating a problem that doesn't exist. It literally takes a couple seconds to grab your phone. And the type of people who don't have their phone aren't the target audience. I feel like they're targeting people obsessed with the latest technology. Who else would want this?;
I bought smartwatch once just to see what's so special about it.
The fact that it's worse version of my regular analog watch - which is pretty much obsolete, function wise, in this day and age - made it one do the worst money I've spend in the last 3 years.
To be fair, the device he uses might be the same as on the website, size-wise. On the interaction with the candy bar (12:58) you can see the most part of it is hidden in some pocket below the lens-and-projector part, as he even touches his jacket (and thereby the interaction-point I guess).
But I agree, the use seems minimalistic and niche. Imagine a hand full of people standing in the supermarket, all of then interacting with their thingy, talking to it and getting talked to by it. Would drive me nuts.
I’d honestly sooner make my current pc more powerful with smaller tech since I think it’d be easier to use for something like a writing project. I know people write on their phones, I just prefer writing on my pc for college papers & the like. I guess what I’m trying to say, why not make what we already have run better & faster for usability
I think people forget as well that LTE watches were a thing already a decade ago. When I worked in phone sales in 2013-2014, folks that worked on power lines purchased them so they could take calls hands free without losing their hands or have earbuds in.
Honestly, as a guy into AI, you're the first I've heard of this. And I haven't seen it even mentioned on r/Singularity, r/LLama, or r/Artificial_Intelligence. I don't know if AI people are really as hyped about this as you suggest, and as a guy who follows AI, I'm not interested in it at all.
Phones need to be smaller because I want an Omni tool embedded in my arm at some point before I die
small form factors have a lot of issues. heat, power and signal are the obvious limitations.
i'm actually surprised that a mobile OS hasn't made a version yet where once you dock your phone to a screen/input it gives you a full desktop experience.
Ubuntu touch tried to do it with convergence in i think 2016 and failed, because app ecosystem wasnt as good as in android at that time. Still ubuntu touch was quite cool. And also samsung devices has this with dex. You connect phone to usb-c monitor and you can use it as a pc. Dex concept reminds me of i think 2017 when some company (dont remember how exactly it was called but i tried that OS) tried to port android to desktop pc's.
@@illuvialpink couldn't agree more. at the time i had bought a phone specifically because of it's ubuntu touch support.
wasn't aware samsung had tried it though i dislike their andoid fork, though that's a different conversation.
i just feel Google is missing an easy shot by not mashing chromebook/android together.
@@def_NaN sadly google became like apple, waits for other vendors to innovate and if they succeed, only then they implement it. Good example is foldable pixel. I'm iOS dev, but apple's nose picking and waiting for god knows what is killing me, meanwhile google picked their nose for 4 generations of foldables.
Same thing i expect that they will wait for samsung dex to exceed, but until then, they wont be implementing something similar.
It makes me think of the episode of The Orville, where everyone had pins that represented their social rating. Everyone could rate each other in person.
If their rating is high, you were essentially infallible. If it's low, they went to jail (or worse)!
Something like that on the fashion runway would be hilariously appropriate. 😅
As a concept, it is arguably cool. Though in function it is little different to a smartwatch, which isn't unnecessary but also not as useful as they are made out to be.
I'm going to be honest the pin is totally useless even for those with disabilities. As you said it'll flap around on clothing, if I want to use that whole food or read label thing why not have it on my head. I don't know maybe mounted into my glasses so that it sees what I see. Or if I have a mobility issue it should be on my arm to make it both accessible to First Responders or my Friends and Family.
How long untill we get the AI brick? the AI floor tile? AI water?
I think some of the top end watches nowadays can actually do a lot more on the phone hardware. You can attach an e-sim to it and use data. The highest end applewatch can do things like play music, take calls, send messages ect all directly on the hardware
Some people only knows criticism, and some are in RUclips
10:33 - And if it is cut out and you do have to touch your hand, it's one more limb needed versus the phone or watch as they can both be answered using voice - Showing buttons on his hand, suggests being able to touch. I think you're right, this is all very vague to sell something to people with more money than sense that like to be the first to own something on the back of buzz-words.
Hi Callum, thanks for the review. I agree with your comments. I work with disabilities and low-income families. Many of the kids in these families use their phones to do homework, receive tutoring, tele-meds appointments; as well as shop or pay bills, because they don't have a computer. Many of us who are economically fortunate don't always realize there is still a large population of people we come into contact with daily, living paycheck to paycheck. This type of product may look good on paper, but as you have stated, it's not functional for daily use, and definitely not useable for families who need and use their phone/ phone screen to complete hundreds of daily tasks that require visually reviewing data and information. I'm not saying this can't be a good investment, but it's definitely going to be considered a luxury or novelty item vs a resource or productivity tool.
I watched the TED Talk previously and I didn't even think about the computational horsepower an AI model would need. My work laptop can't run a decent Speech-to-text model so I don't expect this little thing to be able to.
It is probably sending all the data back to apple, much like a smart speaker
What he said in the TED talk and you backed him up on about computer power getting higher whilst also getting smaller is not exactly true! Yes, the computing devices shown on the screen as he said it do go up in power while shrinking in size, well, except for the phone to watch as that watch will have less computing power than a phone released at the same time. But look at more powerful desktop computers. They are just as big now, if not bigger, as they were in the late 90's and are way more powerful than the phones and 'smart' watches. We can get powerful CPUs into smaller packages but the most power still comes from the larger machines.
I didn't even make it 10 minutes into the video before having to write a comment.
"AR is not the way, they're just moving the screens :)"
>proceeds to change the screen into a projector and calls it innovative
How many 'prototype' phones did we see previewed in the 2000s that had weird projector keyboards and how many times did we realize it's a terrible idea?
And how many of those actually came out?
This must be wonderful to use in crowded, noisy city streets.
I love how all these amgic devices fail the click test. Bascally the click test is a way to know if your upgrade is actually an upgrade or just flashy overcomplication of an already stablished system by counting how many clicks or steps it takes you to complete the same task in the newer version against the older version. And in this you can tell that at minimun the clicks remai the same. Starting from that you'd have to raise your hand to face level, and interact in the palm of your hand, you know just as you would with a simple phone. Then unless that thing has like the absolute best AI driven speakers adn phone in order to isolate any external noise and boost the sgnal directing your voice to the mic and the speaker sounds to your ears, you'd still need to sync blutooth earphones to it and wear them. Then unless they either solve the entropy conundrum and give this thing unlimited energy or pretend to have an incredibly large and wastefull wireless charging infrastructure, you'd still ahve to plug that thing at the end of the day. So basically is just a phone with less features and accesibility, WHICH BTW what about people with different capabilities, what if you dont ahve a hand, what if you are mute? anyway, this thing does nothing an iphone with siri can do, and the things it does it does way worse.
A 'smart watch' is an external monitor for your phone, plus a bluetooth peripheral with some sensors. That's why I don't bother with 'em. My phone already does all of it. The small convenience of flipping my wrist over instead of touching my phone on its charging stand isn't worth several hundred $ more.
Reminds me of dystopian sci fi civilizations that store the memory of executed prisioners into accessories for people to wear
I don't think people understand the whole point of this is so that you do no have to open "apps" to do simple daily tasks. That is the simplicity of it. It works how it should be, natural and screen-less. Besides, I think in the TED talk he has the device hidden in a pocket, only the top part is visible, it very much is the same device.
To be honest, the only progress in this area that I am looking forward is the increase of batteries capacity on our phones, tablets and laptops.
Wow, he made Alexa tiny! AI is the new crypto.
Last I looked. Many smart watches rely on your phone to do pretty much all of the computing. the watch itself doesn't and can't do it. That's why they put other little devices like tracking your heart beat and things like that into it. it's because the watch isn't really doing the work. It's just giving you another access point to your phone.
I'm reminded of the devolver digital skit a few years back where they were announcing games that would never release on an endless cycle.
Having a projector in a public space gives no privacy!
I can't believe thos is a main TED talk, not a TEDX talk that anybody who can do. TED talks are usually inspiring, thought-provoking and add value. This is just a sales pitch.
I would definitely forget to take it off a shirt and put it through the washing machine.
Depending on the projection.. it.. well needing to hold up your hand is a bit odd. Definitely a gimmick targeted to those with money
Aren't there projector keyboards that are used in a similar way? All I hear from them is how much of a pain they are to use. I think the concept of the pin is nifty, but it's a novelty at best as presented. There isn't a single function shown that really grabs my attention.
those keyboards have more ghosting than actual old ass keyboards.
Projector keyboards have an important advantage: they're placed at a near 90° angle to your hands.
The way he's using this, his right hand would be blocking all view from the wearable if he tried to press the button being projected. Hell, he'd block the projector.
It's about bypassing privacy laws and getting access to customer information companies like Apple and Google don't want to give, so new hardware allows for a new service and contract, not given to developers.
a step-cousin of mine, has bought a couple smart watches, but actually stashed them a week later because they didn't really have a use for them.
I dont think this has uses even for disabled people. For example, in the area of acessories for visually impaired, it is much better to just use a normal smartphone with an app. (and probably cheaper too). If you want the text-to-speech capability (which in this area existed literally for decades), you just get a small headphone on one of your ears and connect it with your phone through Bluetooth. This also prevents from everyone around you hearing your search results for your connecting bus for example, which would just be annoying to people around you (constantly hearing the app/device reading everything on the screen) and wouldnt tell everyone with potentionally nefarious goals exactly where and what time you will be. I literally cant think of any single use cases for this device (which wont be cheap at all Im sure).