Hacker News Reader

>Humane is trying to realize the promise of “ambient computing” — an artificial intelligence-driven computing experience that’s personal and contextual — by building a software platform and hardware line that doesn’t rely on screens.

This reads to me as along the lines of, "I speak aloud to an AI and it replies, rather than taking something out of my pocket", but 'ambient', 'artifical intelligence', and 'doesn't rely on screens' are carrying the weight there. The rest seem like features of such a system.

So airpods with a better assistant? Or Google Glass? Just be up front and don't bs me

I’m thinking they’re still figuring it out, but what comes to mind is AI enabled AirPods, car navigation/entertainment/communication, home automation, etc. so they plan on creating multiple things that interact via the same AI. Maybe Jarvis?

"Press or say 1 if you want directions"

"Press or say 2 if you want to make a phone call"

"Press 9 to repeat the menu"

I think they're trying to play on the user experience revolution that capacitive touch and the iPhone brought to the world, hence framing themselves as "ex iPhone talent", and sell the idea that they can once again revolutionize UX into something more ephemeral.

I remember when the first iPhone came out, people were like "a phone with one button? What the fuck am I gonna do with that?" And then we saw what can be done with that.

I think there are still novel approaches to using computers in your personal life, but they're not readily apparent; truly novel things are never readily apparent. But if the stagnation and devolution of UX as it exists today is any indicator, I highly doubt they can pull it off. They'll either give us overpriced glasses and fake holograms for the flash factor or they'll deliver something none of us can envision, it's probably going to be the former.

It's needlessly and suspiciously vague.

The diagrams suggest it's going to use projection mapping from some portable projector.

Nothing exists currently (as far as I'm aware) that can work bright enough in such a small package to do anything that doesn't work outside of a dark room.

These have come up before I think, and are soon exposed to be vaporware.

I seem to remember a product like this that turned out to be mostly vapour ware.

It was a watch that would project onto your arm.

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2018/4/27/17289572/l...

Edit: Huh, I think this is their product actually: https://techcrunch.com/2023/09/30/humanes-ai-pin-debuts-on-t...

So it's a pin on your chest that will project into your hand.

This sounds almost identical to what the watch tried to do... except exponentially more difficult.

1. It needs to be significantly lighter weight

2. It needs to project significantly further away.

3. It needs to identify the hand only when it is "ready" to be projected on, then aim at it.

This alone would present major issues I think.

I think vector laser projection could probably be done small enough, but not for direct sunlight readability.

> Sorry, I think that's too many buzz words for me to comprehend and I can't take it seriously.

This seems pretty straightforward to me.

"Ambient computing" and "no screens" imply a voice interface (think: earbuds, watch, Trek-like communicator), potentially leveraging augmented reality (think: glasses, windshield) if/when available.

"Personal" and "contextual" suggest that interactions leverage all available signals instead of requiring that you explicitly share all necessary background info as a preamble, and also suggest a level of proactiveness (vs. today's mostly reactive user experiences).

Maybe in that 40 seconds the device could remind you that you wanted to get pasta and suggest the most convenient place to pick it up, update you on recent headlines, ask if it should book your flu shot, or whatever. These seem like nice alternatives to doomscrolling.

Anything smaller than a phone implies even more cloud bound. It might be "ambient", it might be "contextual", but it sure won't be "personal". As in my device, my data, my decisions. "Personalized", sure, but that's merely a distraction from the fact that you are operating a thin client with zero control. A browser allows you to scroll through offerings, a voice interface will send you right to the highest bidder.

> leverage all available signals instead of requiring that you explicitly share all necessary background info

I don't know. I see a prompt like "this website wants your location" as more of a feature than a bug. Explicit permissions are a good thing

> "Personal" and "contextual" suggest that interactions leverage all available signals instead of requiring that you explicitly share all necessary background info as a preamble, and also suggest a level of proactiveness (vs. today's mostly reactive user experiences).

Could you please elaborate

> Could you please elaborate

Sure, here's an example for "contextual": If I'm in my office and say, "Alexa turn on the light", it has no idea what I'm talking about. A contextually-aware device would use some mix of signals — what Bluetooth devices are nearby, when my voice reached the mic compared to other devices within earshot, the sound of typing, etc. — to determine where I am and do the right thing.

Similarly, an example for "proactive": My family has used Alexa for years, and it hasn't noticed a single routine. I haven't bothered to manually program routines because I've decided I no longer want to invest time in anything that locks me into the platform. But a proactive device would eventually figure out that humans tend to need light in dark rooms.

It’s right under the title:

> Humane, founded by ex-Apple talent, might be working on a laser projection system to that replaces our phones and tablets

Laser projection system

So either a projection on a surface, or maybe directly into the eye

Either way, they probably end up displaying the same info as a screen

> maybe directly into the eye

We still haven't solved the problem of screen burn-in, so the outcome of that is going to be hilarious.

My money's on cyberpunk-style HUD visors. Not Oculus, not Google Glass, a transparent, wraparound screen on your face.

> If you can make some other interface that helps me ask for GPS directions or check my emails, sure. But if you're lumping in all this other crap, I know you're just selling vaporware.

Not that I want to defend this particular startup, but if I described the functions of a modern-day smartphone to you back in the 1980s, you'd probably have the same reaction, right? A lot of random, unrelated crap lumped together!

Most of the time, it goes nowhere. But just because somebody is trying to combine a bunch of hitherto-unrelated use cases doesn't mean that the idea is dumb.

Jobs did a great job showing off the first iPhone. iPod + phone + Internet.

And of course iPod was 1000 songs in your pocket.

This is what made it successful. Not bs. We think about jobs as very head in the clouds and saying things like computer is really like a bicycle, but he was very practical and clear

https://youtu.be/x7qPAY9JqE4?si=2OZiIU95haYTyiHn

I don’t think that’s an apt comparison. The smartphones of today allow us to do things unimaginable to people in the 80s.

This startup doesn’t seem to be creating any new use for the technology in your phone, just changing the way you interact with it from a glass screen to a projected screen on your hand or countertop.

Nothing our phones do today was unimaginable in the 1980s. Pick up any pop-sci journal from the era and they had the predictions pretty much nailed down. The stuff just wasn't feasible to do with the technology they had at the time, and they didn't consider that phones, and not some other fashion accessory, would end up as the hubs of our digital lives. Wristwatches, household appliances (e.g., TVs), or calculators seemed like a better bet.

I remember about this being posted about 3 month ago (the product, not the link. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36573437).

Outside of a few marketing and hype terms, the website was so dry it was actually really hard to even get a simple idea of what the product was.

You know that feeling when something is trying just a little too hard? That's hu.ma.ne. I mean look at the domain alone. It's nonsense. Compare it to the place they left: apple.com. Then there's the TED talk. What relevant anything debuted via TED? Most things that get the TED treatment end up being vaporware.

I think there's potential in the technology they're developing as a different type of watch-like device. But all this other cult-like nonsense is way overkill and if I'd have to wager I'd probably pass.

I read a few paragraphs and still didn’t know what the hell it was about. It read like a buzzword bingo.