Oooff … I don’t think it’s like MKBHD to come down so hard on a product. But this thing seemed weird (and probably dumb) when it was launched and so I guess this lines up.
Not that a wearable assistant doesn’t make some sense, but some former Apple higher ups who think they’re good enough to disrupt the smartphone market by … checks notes … relying entirely on other companys’ new/untested/problematic/maybe-just-shit AI services and pretending that all of the other “smart” devices we have just don’t exist in some sort of volley in the ongoing platform wars … really does kinda epitomise all of shittiness of the current tech world.
You must log in or # to comment.
25 minutes is way too long. Could be under 5. Basically it’s glitchy as hell and someone else will do it better. Also costs a ton and has a required subscription.
haha, yea … for sure too long … but that’s kinda youtube these days right?
I’d add (having watching most of the video … at 2x) … that the complete reliance on cloud AI is prohibitively slow and often worse than just a Google (or other specific smartphone app) … and that its committed to being a standalone device and so doesn’t interact with your smartphone or smart watch. Also the battery life seems problematically bad as does the whole projector screen thing.
The thing that gets me … and I’m a little surprised MKBHD didn’t mention it … is how fragile an attempt at disrupting the personal smart-device market it is. It’s basically a smart watch on your chest that talks with cloud AI (with someone’s probably irrational love of tiny projectors as a UI). The moment it takes off, the big companies can make an accessory, just like the smart watches, just like it but which integrates with their existing ecosystems.
Now that level of monopolistic control is a problem, obviously, but it doesn’t detract I think from what looks like a fairly poor attempt from a strangely well and persistently funded “start up” (I’m not sure being former Apple execs counts as “start up”, which is really the problem here I think).
Someone posted on mastodon about this group (“hu.ma.ne” … cuz meaningless dots are cool?) and how the belief from big-tech-employees that they can transition to independent startup business models is probably a complete fallacy that they wish was true. Instead they’re so used to the safety nets, resources and platform security/monopoly of big-tech that they haven’t any idea what it takes to lead a startup to success … but they have the connections to procure funding, hype and attention.
“hu.ma.ne” … cuz meaningless dots are cool?
They bought the ma.ne domain, then created a hu subdomain, so it’s actually a web address, which is kind of cool. But then it just redirects to humane.com, so… yeah.
ha!
Still … what’s wrong with “humane.com”? It’s a decent name for a tech company (if somewhat on the nose).
Nothing wrong with it, some people just think it’s cool to not have a .com adress.
My favorite is chewbac.ca
Ha!
Your comment is too long as well.
tl:dr: too long
First 20 mins according to ChatGPT:
In the YouTube video titled “The Worst Product I’ve Ever Reviewed… For Now,” the reviewer discusses his experience with the Humane AI Pin, a new wearable computer with an AI inside designed to help users throughout their day. Despite its impressive hardware and innovative features, such as a camera, microphone, touchpad, projector with gesture control, and strong build quality, the reviewer expresses disappointment with the user experience and lack of integration with smartphones. He finds the device too expensive, with a cost of $700 plus a $24 monthly subscription, and notes that it often provides incorrect information, has poor voice recognition, and lacks essential features and apps. The reviewer also mentions that the device frequently overheats and is too heavy to be comfortably worn for extended periods. Overall, while the Humane AI Pin shows promise, its current limitations and high cost make it a significant disadvantage compared to modern smartphones.
An AI summarizing the AI generated subtitles for a video that reviews an AI gadget, there’s still room for the video to be AI generated.
Thanks! Not sitting through 25 minutes of waffling for two paragraphs of information
What product? I’m not clicking a YouTube link just to find out the name of the product being reviewed.
Fair! The humane AI pin thingy announced sometime last year.
TLDW: AI cloud is too slow and shitty, the projector UI is too shitty, the battery too shit, and it doesn’t to anything better than just using your smartphone. Don’t buy.
Generally I find the broader picture interesting … like how are they getting funding and what were they doing before chatGPT?
Ok, thanks
Humane AI pin
Most products should validate their assumptions before they even start laying down designs, code, or hardware. If it’s super cutting edge (like this one) there is a temptation to question the feedback and get into ‘build it and they will come’ mode.
But most of the time, testing with real users and validating the revenue model is the prudent path. Hopium is not a currency.
It’s an interesting idea and I see sth like this being used by people who struggle with using tiny phone screens or computers in general, like my grandparents.
I highly doubt someone who’s struggling with a phone is going to do well with a screen projected on your hand that has very sensitive hand interaction requirements.
Good point. I’m mostly talking about the voice interaction part tho
The mbkhd video of the fisker was rough. A whole bunch of minor annoyances and he calls it the worst thing he’s ever reviewed.
I mean… It was the worst car he’s ever reviewed by a long shot.
If you’re sending a car to be reviewed by one of the larger tech YouTubers and you don’t have your shit together it’s not a good look.
Even if you have to send a 1-off faked model that’s Jerry rigged…
They refused to send a model and asked him not to review until the new software was out. So they knew. He bought one anyway.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/watch?v=TitZV6k8zfA
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Can we hold ourselves to a higher standard than to post irritating clickbait? SEO bullshit is fucking cancer that need to stay rotting in Web2.
Ummm … I don’t think this is clickbait … at all. The title? Sure … it’s from the video. But this is a big tech reviewer (whom, FWIW, I’m not particularly partial to) talking about a new product that is not only making buzz but, IMO, is somewhat emblematic of where tech is up to at the moment, especially regarding AI. It’s, IMO, a fair review from a user’s perspective and highlights reasonably enough how rough the idea of taking AI to the consumer market is right now.
Also, looking at the broader picture just a bit as I think I’m trying to, and there’s an odd picture here which, again, I think touches on how the tech industry is going right now. Yes it’s a 1st gen product, but the company isn’t young and the pivot to AI seems glaring to me.
Maybe just scroll and move on if you’re not interested rather than posting irritating content policing?
Expect to find more of this type of user on Lemmy.
I’m noticing a lot of people are just… “anti-everything”.
Edit: Case in point: The person further down this thread who said your comment was too long LMAO
Why more of this type?
It certainly seems to be a bit of a fediverse stereotype though.
You’re right, i’m just going to block and move on, which is what I should have done from the get-go. Sorry for thinking you could correct.
‘kay
Reciprocated
deleted by creator
👋
