[HN Gopher] HP Acquires Humane's AI Software
___________________________________________________________________
HP Acquires Humane's AI Software
Author : colesantiago
Score : 245 points
Date : 2025-02-18 22:15 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (humane.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (humane.com)
| ChrisArchitect wrote:
| Related Bloomberg story:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43095699
| necubi wrote:
| > Device Timeline: Your Ai Pin will continue to function normally
| until 12pm PST on February 28, 2025. After this date, it will no
| longer connect to Humane's servers, and .Center access will be
| fully retired.
|
| > Device Features: Your Ai Pin features will no longer include
| calling, messaging, Ai queries/responses, or cloud access.
|
| For a $700 device that was on the market for less than a year,
| that is a not a stellar way to treat your customers. Fortunately
| it seems there were very few of those.
|
| [0] https://support.humane.com/hc/en-
| us/articles/34374173951373-...
| mrtksn wrote:
| I have this regulation idea:
|
| If the hardware requires software that is not available for
| self service, then the customer is entitled for full refund at
| any time.
|
| In other words if the hardware is just an accessory for
| providing service through software then the money the user pays
| for the hardware should be considered a refundable deposit.
| saulpw wrote:
| You should propose it! I hear the CFPB is looking for new
| ways to protect consumers.
| slantedview wrote:
| Unfortunately the CFPB is in the process of being
| eliminated.
| isiahl wrote:
| I believe that was the joke.
| tmpz22 wrote:
| Hey taxes are MY MONEY and I need that 2 cents back (so I
| can be scammed hundreds of dollars by corporations that
| no longer need to comply with the CFPB)
| walterbell wrote:
| Doesn't the FTC regulate vendor-advertised claims about
| product behavior?
| stackskipton wrote:
| They do but I'm sure Humane has something in their Terms
| of Service about 'We can discontinue service at any
| time.'
| latexr wrote:
| Terms of service don't override laws. If your contract
| has an illegal provision in it then it is not
| enforceable.
| avalys wrote:
| Why is this regulation necessary? You can just choose not to
| buy products whose future you're skeptical of.
|
| In this case, Humane would likely go bankrupt rather than pay
| out the refunds your regulation would require, so it would
| still be ineffective in protecting consumers.
| tbrownaw wrote:
| > _You can just choose not to buy products whose future
| you're skeptical of._
|
| I had a meeting last week whose sole purpose was for me to
| re-describe something a couple times which I had already
| described in text. And which also could be found in vendor
| documentation.
|
| I also know someone who seems to think that (almost?)
| anything pushed on the Internet must be true.
| mrtksn wrote:
| Understanding how products works and what are the risks
| requires a study. It's not realistic that a layman will
| study and understand the implications of the architecture
| of the product.
|
| This regulation will transfer that requirement from the
| consumer to the maker so that the maker can choose to
| create products they issue full refund when they can't
| guarantee perpetual software availability or they can
| choose to make all the software available with the product.
| It also avoids dictating how the product should be designed
| when doing all that.
| rsynnott wrote:
| In this particular case, this is true, and in any case
| approximately nobody bought these, but it's not uncommon
| for large, well-capitalised companies to nuke products when
| convenient (Google likes doing this, say).
| askonomm wrote:
| Why have regulations at all then? Why regulate water purity
| when you can choose to not drink water you're skeptical of,
| or why regulate food if you can just not eat food that
| you're skeptical of? Regulations are there not for you, who
| perhaps knows better, but there for the people who do not.
| Most people are not tech-savvy. Most people believe
| whatever marketing is being shoved down their throat.
|
| An average person does not do or know how to do the due
| diligence of product validation, and I'd argue even the
| tech-savvy of us are unable to figure out if a product is
| going to stick around or not since what info is being given
| to us for analysis is limited, and heavily watered down.
| plagiarist wrote:
| Manifesting the Invisible Hand requires a lot of
| prerequisites that are obviously untrue in the real
| world. Like that customers are able to do research and
| understand the findings.
|
| I don't understand how libertarians look at the current
| state of things and conclude that fewer regulations would
| solve the problem.
| snackbroken wrote:
| > Manifesting the Invisible Hand requires a lot of
| prerequisites that are obviously untrue in the real
| world. Like that customers are able to do research and
| understand the findings.
|
| Worse. It requires that doing so is effectively free.
| Otherwise, a successful strategy is to lower your product
| quality compared to your competitors by an amount just
| shy of the cost of discovering the lower quality. This
| leads to a race to the bottom.
| avalys wrote:
| Yes, and? That very "race to the bottom" is what drives
| progress. Yes, it's much messier than having a central
| authority dictate everything. Such is life.
|
| Making a product cheaper to produce without affecting
| what people care about (or, equivalently, improving the
| performance without increasing the cost) is what drives
| productivity growth, and the relentless competitive
| pressure to do so is what produced the modern world. It's
| not fun or easy, and yes, sitting on your ass would be
| easier. Oh well!
| int_19h wrote:
| The modern world is the one for which we had to invent a
| new word "enshittification" to describe the results of
| that process.
| avalys wrote:
| Are you suggesting that the people who could afford $700
| for a Humane AI pin last year were not capable of doing
| research about the company, its history, its prospects?
| Every one of these people have access to the sum total of
| all human knowledge in 10 seconds at their fingertips.
| Come on.
|
| This is a completely new product, in a category that
| never existed and no one was desperately demanding. It
| was bought with the disposable income of wealthy people
| who enjoy trying new technology and knew exactly the risk
| they were taking. Are you seriously going to dispute
| that? Why is this a space that needs to be regulated?
| avalys wrote:
| Are you saying that all regulation is good, and that
| regulation can't ever be misguided, harmful, counter-
| productive, etc.? And that the best solution to any
| problem is to enact regulation (which doesn't even have
| to be good?)
|
| If you're not saying that, then what is so hard to
| understand about the conclusion that we could solve some
| problems by repealing bad regulations?
| avalys wrote:
| Regulations are necessary where the harm that we're
| protecting against is so severe that avoiding it is worth
| the cost and lost productivity of administering and
| complying with the regulation.
|
| Food and water safety certainly fall in that category!
| Ensuring that early adopters of useless $700 widgets are
| "protected" against startups going bankrupt or otherwise
| discontinuing / canceling the product doesn't seem worth
| anyone's concern.
|
| Some people's reaction to observing anything in society
| that they don't like is "that should be banned!" I don't
| think that's an appropriate reaction.
|
| The proposed regulation would dramatically increase the
| risk of any investment in a new consumer hardware
| startup. And, there are not that many of these startups
| in the first place, because they're risky enough as it
| is! So, the net result would be less innovation and less
| startups doing hardware, and I don't think that would be
| a net improvement.
| tbrownaw wrote:
| > _If the hardware requires software that is not available
| for self service, then the customer is entitled for full
| refund at any time._
|
| If a _service_ it depends on goes away within X years (5?
| 10?) you 're owed a prorated refund.
| latexr wrote:
| Sounds like a good intention with bad consequences. It would
| incentivise operating systems to become subscriptions too.
| Plus, it would never happen. If a company goes bankrupt they
| can't buy back the devices.
|
| I'd rather they were forced to release their software to the
| public, making it a requirement without which bankruptcy or
| sales would be refused by regulatory agencies. That way
| hobbyists could still get them to work, perhaps even launch a
| new company to revive the old devices (reducing e-waste).
| Additionally, we could detect if they had been doing anything
| shady with the data.
| mrtksn wrote:
| I think going bankrupt can be grounds for making the
| software open source or at least free to make the users
| whole. Think of it like a liability, when bankrupt the
| stakeholders can choose to refund customers or make the
| software available - whichever suits them.
| anonzzzies wrote:
| That is far better; this 'blahblah' that, after bankruptcy
| legal reasons prevent from passing out the source should
| not be allowed as excuse.
| kjellsbells wrote:
| That might also have bad consequences (not because the idea
| is bad, but because corps will try to route around it).
| It'll start with pieces of the software not being able to
| be released because they were licensed from a third party,
| and end with software development teams being organized
| into contract shops that own the code and thus (oh! How
| sad!) are regrettably unable to supply any code after the
| bankruptcy of the main entity. Would need very careful
| rules from regulators to try and anticipate tricks like
| this.
| whilenot-dev wrote:
| > because they were licensed from a third party
|
| *or they were violating open source licenses like some
| startups just do.
|
| But in either case a reasonable fine could be
| appropriate.
| Griffinsauce wrote:
| I agree it should be carefully designed but let's be
| honest, all those outs can be solved if lawmakers are
| willing.
| jeffwask wrote:
| > If a company goes bankrupt they can't buy back the
| devices.
|
| Yes, but in this specific scenario the purchasing entity is
| far from bankrupt at least financially.
| outside1234 wrote:
| Oligarchs will say no
| nashashmi wrote:
| Then the hardware is not a purchase, but a lease (without
| time limits). And the vendor would have to refund lease
| payment if it stops working.
|
| If you want to go the other way, a hardware that requires a
| paid service should be jail-breakable. If the designated
| service stops working, then the service should be open-
| sourced. (We would love this on HN but just imagine the
| OpenSource overload engineers like us would be overwhelmed
| with to the point no one would try.)
| madeofpalk wrote:
| What customers?
|
| > Humane's daily returns are outpacing sales
|
| https://www.theverge.com/2024/8/7/24211339/humane-ai-pin-mor...
| jeffwask wrote:
| And the results here are exactly why I will never be an early
| adopter of a $700 AI gadget
| wepple wrote:
| > We understand this transition may be difficult
|
| You have to be a right knob to describe this as a "transition"
| trhway wrote:
| it looks like the company was already "transitioning" - $116M
| for 200 people in AI, and that nowdays when an NVDA or PLTR
| employee is $70M+ each. It looks like they were trying and
| failed to get $750M-$1B just half a year ago, and even that
| would normally be a bargain for 200 people.
| msephton wrote:
| Where is the 200 figure from?
| trhway wrote:
| google search :) some places even say 260 and 300+.
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| It sounds like they just bought a bunch of patents. I'm not
| sure they would keep the acquihires from such a...
| successful product
| InsideOutSanta wrote:
| Death is a transition, I guess.
| llaolleh wrote:
| Not a humane way to treat your customers...
| latexr wrote:
| > $700
|
| Plus monthly subscription.
| cgcrob wrote:
| HP is where things go to die.
|
| (Since 1999 that is)
| sumoboy wrote:
| I thought that was IBM, so confusing anymore.
| Spooky23 wrote:
| Broadcom became the ultimate necromancer when they acquired
| Computer Associates and digested them. OpenText is the
| smaller version.
| rsynnott wrote:
| It's been different companies at different times, but over
| the last 20 years HP does seem to have been particularly
| prolific at buying weird mostly-dead junk.
| throw16180339 wrote:
| Does anyone else remember when the HP Way was a positive
| statement?
| paxys wrote:
| So this is just an acquihire right? Can't imagine what HP will do
| with Humane's "AI software" (aka ChatGPT wrapper).
| ryandrake wrote:
| Gruber[1] posted that Bloomberg reported[2]: "Humane's team,
| including founders Imran Chaudhri and Bethany Bongiorno, will
| form a new division at HP to help integrate artificial
| intelligence into the company's personal computers, printers
| and connected conference rooms, said Tuan Tran, who leads HP's
| AI initiatives."
|
| So they'll hang around as some sort of director-level Thought
| Leaders or something? Sounds like a safe and lucrative landing.
|
| 1: https://daringfireball.net
|
| 2:
| https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-02-18/hp-116-mi...
| tyre wrote:
| AI Printers, hell yeah brother
| ryandrake wrote:
| Hey, now, don't give Brother any ideas!
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| Heeyy morning Jeff! Looks like we are still low on yellow
| ink today, so I'm probably not going to be able print
| anything for you. But if you'd like I could order a new
| cartridge set direct from HP? Would you like me to go ahead
| with that order or remind you in 15 minutes with another
| friendly greeting?
|
| If you like I could call you on your cell to remind you,
| send you a text, email you, or I could just shout loudly
| from right here in printer!
| edm0nd wrote:
| Office Spaceing my printer once it starts to do this
| blululu wrote:
| It's a printer, obviously the ai will be printing out
| this message in cyan with a yellow highlight to emphasize
| the urgency of the matter.
| gorbachev wrote:
| Jeff: "Please print two copies of my book report"
|
| HP Printer: "I'm sorry Jeff, I'm afraid I can't do that"
| kjs3 wrote:
| HP Printer: "I'm sorry Jeff, I'm afraid I can't do
| that...not only have you not ordered your required yellow
| cartridge refill, your page account is empty. Until you
| put down your credit card buy some HP approved paper and
| right to print credits we're stuck. I suggest the 500
| page bundle which is on sale 1% off with coupon code
| UTOOL25. While we're at it, I see your book report is
| about 'The Sun Also Rises'? Did you know that just like
| Jake, 4 out 10 men experience ED and I can order
| something to help you with that from our partners at
| HIMS..."
|
| Our bright, shiny future...
| ttepasse wrote:
| The tracking dots that printers print on their copies are
| printed in yellow. No wonder the yellow ink is empty.
| outside1234 wrote:
| Still steaming over the porn you printed yesterday Jeff,
| any more where that came from?
| bikson wrote:
| That's why cylons rebel. "They look and feel like printers.
| Some are programmed to think they are printer."
| lenerdenator wrote:
| HP AI-enabled printer?
|
| What, did the state of California ask them to develop a new
| punishment for tech workers convicted of murder? Is Hans
| Reiser being tortured with this?
| JaggedJax wrote:
| Surely it's so they can feed error messages like "PC LOAD
| LETTER" into the model and get a sometimes semi-accurate
| explanation.
| ksynwa wrote:
| Is this what they call falling upwards?
| gorbachev wrote:
| HP printers are already some of the most anti-consumer
| printers on the market. Can't wait to see what this group of
| people manages to achieve. /s
| esskay wrote:
| Which means they'll be shoved into an office for a year
| before being encouraged to move on. There's not really a role
| there for them, they were a company that made a chatgpt
| wrapper, the idea that they have a clue how to run an actual
| AI based operation is laughable.
| cmg wrote:
| This isn't obvious at all but you can click the star next to
| an item that's "Linked" on DF (where the title goes to
| another site) to get a permalink to the item on DF itself!
| https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/02/18/hp-buys-humane
| ryandrake wrote:
| Oh, wow, that UX is clear as mud. Thanks!
| xyst wrote:
| More like IP acquisition and shelving for future IP litigation
| if AI bubble continues.
| locusofself wrote:
| This is the only thing that makes sense to me.
| MBCook wrote:
| I agree. You can make an OS for a small device cheaper than
| that. You can hire the people for less than that.
|
| I don't see how they have anything of value at all other
| than patents.
| pwthornton wrote:
| It seems like that and the 300ish patents. The patents
| themselves could be worth quite a bit.
|
| It's possible they think the OS and the team that built it
| could have value if put to better uses than building an AI pin.
| nikanj wrote:
| We are looking at another gold rush where the US patent
| office lets you patent absolutely anything
|
| I still remember a few of the previous ones, like "A mundane
| everyday thing...on a computer!" and "The same thing every
| company has been doing for decades...but over the internet!"
|
| Be mentally prepared for a few decades of stifled innovation,
| as every perfectly-ordinary-thing-but-with-ai patent is
| suppressing the market
| vunderba wrote:
| Remember when Apple patented a "ornamental design for a
| portable display device" and tried to sue Samsung? I'm
| sorry but the idea that you can patent a shape is just
| super depressing.
|
| https://consor.com/apple-patents-a-rectangle
| apetresc wrote:
| I mean, if you look at Imran Chaudhri's personal homepage
| (http://www.imranchaudhri.com) I think you'll get a sense of
| how valuable those patents might be.
| svieira wrote:
| https://patents.google.com/patent/US20160300072
|
| > Device, method, and graphical user interface for
| accessing an application in a locked device
| Cockbrand wrote:
| I didn't care about looking at the individual patents, and
| I can't have a qualified opinion on Imran Chaudhri as a
| person or as an engineer. But I did have to snicker when I
| saw the Aphex Twin reference on his homepage.
| light_triad wrote:
| Interesting they thought they could disrupt phones: devices with
| almost 20 years of iterative improvements, extremely mature app
| stores, tons of functionality, fast ubiquitous internet, etc.
|
| You couldn't even connect the Ai Pin to your phone ?! Lock-in
| makes sense but it was a very risky bet.
|
| Essential viewing: Review of the Ai Pin - The Worst Product I've
| Ever Reviewed... For Now
| (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TitZV6k8zfA)
| bee_rider wrote:
| Huh, it is weird to think of smartphones as entrenched
| incumbents. Of course, they are. But it is weird (they are the
| first type of device where I was familiar with a world before
| them).
| aussieguy1234 wrote:
| It's also interesting that, prior to the iPhone, no one would
| have thought that phones would disrupt the PC market.
| light_triad wrote:
| There's some revisionism here: having the internet in your
| pocket anywhere you went was a clear upgrade. Projecting a
| screen on your palm with low resolution was a clear
| downgrade.
|
| Disruption is incredibly difficult but this product was
| giving off Juicero vibes from the start.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| That might also be because iPhone happened to coincide
| exactly when 3G mobile broadband internet became available.
|
| Pre and post 3G mobile broadband were different worlds.
| MBCook wrote:
| It absolutely was on the ragged edge of viable. In the
| first one (and 3G) you could easily scroll a webpage faster
| than it could render it.
|
| But it did what it needed enough to be extremely
| compelling. And it improved very fast in the early years.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I remember streaming Pandora in summer of 2008 and
| thinking how amazing is it that I can listen to whatever
| music I want on the go. And it got better and better by
| the week, it seemed. I don't recall ever having issues
| with insufficient bandwidth, almost everything I expected
| to work, worked when I needed it to (in NYC).
|
| It wasn't long before we had Maps, Latitude, Yelp, Four
| Square, Twitter, so many possibilities due to combo of
| camera + mobile broadband + GPS + battery technology to
| allow on the go computation and communication.
| rsynnott wrote:
| 3G smartphones (mostly Nokia N60 platform) were a thing
| from about 2002 in some European markets, with rather
| limited uptake. The real killer feature of the iPhone, at
| least initially (remember the first one didn't have 3G in
| any case) was a browser that didn't make you want to throw
| the thing out the window in frustration every time you used
| it.
|
| The iPhone was pleasant to use, or at least not actively
| infuriating. That was, to a large extent, all it took.
|
| Nokia really messed up, here; there was nothing stopping
| them making an iPhone-ish thing (perhaps without
| multitouch) a few years previous to the iPhone coming out,
| and there was even a semi-decent third party browser for
| their platform (Opera) which they could have taken cues
| from or bought, but they were always far more excited about
| the featurephone market, seeing smartphones as a niche.
| vel0city wrote:
| 3G connectivity was available for several years before the
| first iPhone launched. I had 3G phones in the US in 2005.
|
| iPhone was late to the 3G game. It was one of the
| complaints of the original iPhone, that it didn't have 3G
| despite so many other devices out there already having it.
| lotsofpulp wrote:
| I don't remember anyone using mobile broadband though, is
| it possible the networks weren't ready for high usage in
| the earlier years? All people were doing is checking
| email and BlackBerry messenger texting.
|
| I guess it could also have have just been a superior
| business strategy to compel ATT to offer unlimited data
| so that people could freely explore the possibilities
| without worrying about overage charges.
| vel0city wrote:
| I used my phone for USB tethering a good bit on the go. I
| also had a version of Google Maps in 2005ish timeframe on
| 3G. I would often be able to stream music from internet
| mp3 and aac streams. I also had Opera Mini in 2005 over
| 3G internet.
|
| It was only like $15/mo for unlimited data to add to my
| dumb phone plan. I didn't use the free dumb phone with
| the plan, I just popped the SIM into other devices.
| amazingamazing wrote:
| this is a good reminder for all those developers that seem to
| think marketing is meaningless
| robinhood wrote:
| It's not actually. The problem was not marketing. The problem
| was the product itself. No marketing could have helped them, as
| the product was so bad. The good reminder here, is to build
| something people actually want.
| wnevets wrote:
| > The problem was the product itself.
|
| Pretty sure the person means HP bought a joke of a
| company/product because of the marketing.
| Mistletoe wrote:
| Oh wow I totally missed that angle. In that respect the
| marketing was genius.
| amazingamazing wrote:
| yes
| madeofpalk wrote:
| What are you saying? That Humane didn't market their useless
| device better? Or that they had such great marketing they were
| able to land at HP?
| amazingamazing wrote:
| the latter - the fact this product had any traction leading
| to this is a result of marketing almost entirely.
| BobbyTables2 wrote:
| The HPs have acquired too many near worthless companies.
|
| I feel its more a cargo cult mentality among the
| executives.
| whyenot wrote:
| My prediction is that HP will make some half-hearted attempts to
| do something with it for a while, and then will sell it at a loss
| to LG. LG will use it in one or two of their smart TVs and then
| release it as open source, at which point it will be forgotten.
| (ref: WebOS)
| kylehotchkiss wrote:
| Ugh smart TVs powered by Humane by HP x LG makes me want to
| throw all my electronics into a volcano
| wepple wrote:
| Ugh smart... makes me want to throw all my electronics into a
| volcano
|
| But yeah what you said is way worse
| throw16180339 wrote:
| I think I'd prefer to just go live in a cave.
| lelandfe wrote:
| A voice booms, " _these allegorical shadows brought to you
| by Mountain Dew_ "
| throw16180339 wrote:
| Any reference to Plato's _The Republic_ deserves an
| upvote.
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| If it's functional, I'd love to use a laser projection on my
| couch when I misplace my TV remote. Especially if it's able
| to adapt to my TV's current context
| MBCook wrote:
| Given the reviews of the humane pin I wouldn't hold my
| breath.
| cancerhacker wrote:
| imagine an ai tv that was given the prompt to continuously
| encourage viewers to sign up for LG/HP instant pixel delivery
| service and that it should be noted that many viewers feel
| great satisfaction with the service, and are frequently
| considered the most attractive people within your area.
| plagiarist wrote:
| This sounds like a robot character in a sci-fi novel, but
| the reality would actually be tedious.
| internet2000 wrote:
| For what it's worth LG stuck with WebOS.
| https://www.lg.com/us/webos
|
| The LG version never looked like anything Palm/HP put out,
| which makes me wonder what LG actually bought, but it's still
| around.
| Angostura wrote:
| WebOS in the TVs is still going isn't it't? I have a TV that
| uses it, and it's great
| h1fra wrote:
| WebOS is far more superior than android tv
| ndiddy wrote:
| > Humane's AI platform Cosmos, backed by an incredible group of
| engineers, will help us create an intelligent ecosystem across
| all HP devices from AI PCs to smart printers and connected
| conference rooms. This will unlock new levels of functionality
| for our customers and deliver on the promises of AI.
|
| I can't wait for an HP AI printer
| pedalpete wrote:
| Is this the playbook they followed for Palm? I can't remember
| who ended up with it in the end. But at least Palm had a decent
| operating system.
| pityJuke wrote:
| > Ai Pin will still allow for offline features like battery level
|
| > https://support.humane.com/hc/en-us/articles/34243204841997-...
|
| The only feature they could think of was "battery level"? That's
| hilarious
| ceejayoz wrote:
| It's like the Rick and Morty bit about the butter bot.
|
| "What is my purpose?"
|
| "You say your battery level."
|
| "Oh my God."
| latexr wrote:
| Direct link to the FAQ entry:
|
| https://support.humane.com/hc/en-us/articles/34243204841997-...
|
| I like that it says "battery level, etc". I'd really like to
| see the full list of features.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| I think it might _be_ the list.
| latexr wrote:
| I think so too. Which only makes me want to see it even
| more. An admission that there is nothing else.
| pedalpete wrote:
| if it is doing battery level, I guess it is also doing
| power on, and leds. It doesn't say it does charging
| anymore, so maybe it does battery level until it goes to 0?
| wiredfool wrote:
| Pretty sure it will let you buy a new ink cartridge too.
| rvz wrote:
| Of course. It definitely wasn't worth $1B as I said before [0]
| when they tried to sell at that valuation. [1]
|
| [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40598742
|
| [1] https://www.theverge.com/2024/6/6/24172718/humane-ai-pin-
| sel...
| ceejayoz wrote:
| The Verge on this:
|
| https://www.theverge.com/news/614883/humane-ai-hp-acquisitio...
|
| > After the shutdown, offline features like "battery level" will
| still work, Humane says, but "any function that requires cloud
| connectivity like voice interactions, AI responses, and .Center
| access" will not.
|
| I'd really like to know if the Humane PR flack typed that with a
| straight face.
| tough wrote:
| ChatGPT can!
| Mistletoe wrote:
| "Battery levels are fine. Jump on in!"
| watusername wrote:
| The charitable interpretation is that they wanted to assure
| buyers that they would still be able to show off the laser
| projector to their friends :)
|
| But no, I wouldn't be able to write that sentence myself
| without wanting to find the closest hole to hide out of
| embarrassment.
| interactivecode wrote:
| Hopefully it will also improve the product design engineering
| quality at HP. While the AI pin is a bit useless the industrial
| product design is at a high level. From what I remember it's
| mostly an core of Apple engineers
| throwaway314155 wrote:
| I thought they specifically outsourced the design to another
| company (Teenage Engineering).
| jsheard wrote:
| That was the Rabbit R1, a similar AI wearable which similarly
| didn't work.
| MBCook wrote:
| It wasn't a wearable, it was a small portable device. It
| looked kind of similar to the Playdate game console if you
| know what that is.
|
| Teenage Engineering also helped with that, so it makes
| sense.
| jsheard wrote:
| The charging case had to be recalled because it was a potential
| fire hazard, and the pin itself had a tendency to overheat
| during normal use. Hardly a success story on the hardware
| front.
| dangus wrote:
| lol, no it's not.
|
| The basic premise that people would want to wear a device as a
| pin is an industrial design failure.
|
| The entire product is bad industrial design. Being built with
| nice materials is not automatically good industrial design.
|
| It was a scam destined to fail and HP is making a stupid
| acquisition of worthless tech.
| ChrisGammell wrote:
| Coming soon to your next printer: navigate through menus with a
| pico projector sending dim light onto your outstretched palm...
| nocoiner wrote:
| Hell, forget printing - it can just beam a picture of your
| documents onto a nearby wall. Chalk up another patent from
| Imran!
| psyonity wrote:
| After refilling your projector ink levels, ofcourse.
| MBCook wrote:
| Honestly that might be better than the terrible 1 inch LCD
| screens some modern ink jets have.
| PyWoody wrote:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ntPxdWAWq8
|
| :%s/Cloud/AI/g
| xyst wrote:
| > highly skilled technical talent, and intellectual property with
| more than 300 patents and patent applications.
|
| The only reason a dinosaur like HP is even buying out this no-
| name player.
| hnburnsy wrote:
| From Robert Scoble...
|
| >The end of an AI hardware experiment. Lots of reasons this
| didn't do well, from trying to get people to do something they
| don't already do (wear a computer on their clothes) to poor
| execution. The research @IrenaCronin and I do shows glasses are
| the form factor but they are still years from having decent all
| color displays. Until then it will be hard to get people to use
| much other than their phones.
| AlexandrB wrote:
| Whenever I see Robert Scoble's name this is all I can think of:
| https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jwherrman/yes-you-can-w...
| klausa wrote:
| I tend to think more of
| https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/doree/woman-accuses-
| rob... but yours is also on my mind whenever the name pops
| up.
| zombiwoof wrote:
| Is Scoble still relevant?
| eej71 wrote:
| Something something lesser monster in the backrooms vibe is
| what I feel now when I see that picture.
| delfinom wrote:
| Lol "glasses are the form factor".
|
| Ignoring the massive industry of people actively having their
| eyeballs cut open and lasered just to avoid wearing glasses.
| hnburnsy wrote:
| Sunglasses, protective eyewear, and glasses for blocking blue
| light are things.
| wnevets wrote:
| that's a name I haven't heard in well over decade
| rsynnott wrote:
| > Lots of reasons this didn't do well, from trying to get
| people to do something they don't already do (wear a computer
| on their clothes) to poor execution.
|
| Huh, has Scoble... matured and grown? Got to admit I haven't
| been paying attention to him for a long time, but the above is
| discordant, coming from Google Glass Superfan Number One.
| ttepasse wrote:
| On his Twitter account he seems to have rebranded, from
| Metaverse/Spatial computing enthusiast to a general AI
| person.
|
| Frustrating, because his "Next year Apple will..."
| predictions in his AR/VR phase were wild and utterly out
| there. I remember he predicted Apple Glasses the size of
| small sunglasses were coming next year. There was also a
| prediction of a completely transparent iPhone, just a pane of
| glass. I still wonder how that would have worked in his mind.
| asadotzler wrote:
| He spends his days on Musk's Nazi platform preaching the "VR
| any minute" gospel to the 50K people still using their Apple
| Vision Pros. It makes for the funniest circle jerk in tech
| circles. Robert is 1/6th the man he was as a paid Microsoft
| shill. He never recovered his credibility after his Google
| Glass shower scene made the social media rounds, and now has
| no one to sit at his feet listening to his deep tech wisdom
| except the VR die hards and the engagement farmers.
| plagiarist wrote:
| I have no idea what Apple was thinking with the Vision. It
| is priced for professionals but then all the promo material
| was regarding various ways to isolate yourself from your
| family.
|
| I wish they'd slim it down and make it affordable for a
| normal human so they can iterate on it. But even then I
| would not buy it unless someone gets us to an unlocked
| bootloader and Linux.
| wilg wrote:
| If any VCs who "invested" some of the $230 million into the
| dumbest product ever from obvious morons would like to instead
| invest with me, I'm pretty confident I can do better than a 0.5x
| return!
| signatoremo wrote:
| Are you sure? If given $230 millions what would you do and
| which AI product would you build, to generate $115 millions?
| sonofhans wrote:
| You're kidding, right? In no way did Humane generate $115
| million; they lost over $100 million. The list of ways not to
| do that is infinite.
|
| Start with: an AI which emits a binary yes/no to, "Should I
| invest some of this $230 million such that it becomes $115
| million 5 years from now."
| signatoremo wrote:
| I mistakenly thought they generated a totally of $116
| million in revenue.
|
| I meant to ask "If you were to get $230 million, how would
| you plan to generate as much money as Humane was able to
| generate during the length of its existence". Do you have
| an answer?
|
| > an AI which emits a binary yes/no to, "Should I invest
| some of this $230 million such that it becomes $115 million
| 5 years from now."
|
| If you were pitching that to me, I'd ask: what is the AI's
| confidence in its answer, and how can you verify that?
| vel0city wrote:
| > how would you plan to generate as much money as Humane
| was able to generate during the length of its existence".
| Do you have an answer?
|
| Humane generated _negative_ $114M. They turned $230M into
| $116M.
|
| My prospectus is to buy a $1M house, throw $1M parties
| every day for a month, and burn the house down at the end
| and sell the charred remains for $1. I'll take a million
| dollar salary for these services. Then I'll shut it all
| down and return the leftovers to the investors.
|
| So total expenses for this endeavor: $1M + 31 * $1M + $1M
| in salaries so $33M. That's $81M better than Humane did,
| and I'll do it in less time!
| skuhn wrote:
| I would immediately shut down and return $114 million to the
| investors. I'm keeping that extra $1 million as a tip for
| prompt service.
| signatoremo wrote:
| Is that your pitch? Do you think anyone would give you the
| money?
| saagarjha wrote:
| No the pitch is guaranteed returns
| MBCook wrote:
| A variation on the Michael Dell plan. Smart.
| wilg wrote:
| You meant to write "generate $-115 million" I think. I'd
| start by putting all the money under a mattress which is
| already doing way better than Humane. Then I'd try to think
| of something fun to make.
| signatoremo wrote:
| The trick is you'd have to tell the VC how you'd spend
| their money before you get the money.
| wilg wrote:
| I don't think I should have to if they previously
| invested in Humane
| signatoremo wrote:
| Their investors are well known. May be you can give it a
| try? Easy money.
|
| > Humane raised $240 million in funding from high-profile
| investors, including Marc Benioff, the chief executive of
| Salesforce, and his counterpart at OpenAI, Sam Altman
|
| https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/18/technology/hp-humane-
| ai-p...
| latexr wrote:
| I think you're taking the joke too seriously. The user
| you're replying to clearly doesn't think their idea would
| raise money, they're taking a dig at how obviously bad of
| an investment Humane was.
| ndiddy wrote:
| I like the idea of Sam Altman investing in a physical
| OpenAI wrapper. That's one way to try to increase
| revenue.
| latexr wrote:
| > and which AI product would you build
|
| Why would it need to be AI? VC investors care about making
| money, not how.
| rsynnott wrote:
| Ah, I mean that is the theory, but the practice, today, is
| that you have to say the magic word to get money. This is
| actually fairly normal VC behaviour; the market as a whole
| has always been rather fad-driven.
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| You don't need to generate $115M - just lose $115M and there
| you go
| exogeny wrote:
| It's not a 0.5x. It's much lower -- $230 million was the amount
| raised, not the valuation. It's closer to 0.1-0.2x.
| necubi wrote:
| The parent is right, investors would almost certainly have 1x
| preference, which means they get back the first $230M in an
| acquisition. The valuation doesn't matter if you exit for
| less than money in.
|
| Founders and employees would get nothing out of this (aside
| from whatever HP is giving them directly as incentive to
| stick around).
| braza wrote:
| That's the most interesting thing because if those folks
| managed to get a parachute for their 1x pref investors with
| this abysmal final price, what does it mean for the several
| companies at the same situation?
|
| It's a pity that we do not have a version of "Who's holding
| the bag?"[1] for LP and VC funds, but with all challenges
| to raise money, it would be interesting to see how many
| funds are losing money at the moment.
|
| This is the inherent feature from VC funds but still, one
| thing is raise cheap money and having a "circular" money
| flowing (from A -> B - (...) -> IPO -> A) but if they do
| not arrive even in the IPO how this ecosystem will work if
| a US 5 Year Coupon pays 4.40%?
|
| [1] - https://pscmevents.com/wp-
| content/uploads/2023/03/Who-Is-Hol...
| rsynnott wrote:
| Bear in mind that some of these VCs likely preferentially
| invest only in dumb AI things, so won't be interested in your
| thing if it is too sensible.
| ipsum2 wrote:
| Humane raised $230 million, sold at $116 million.
| newsclues wrote:
| The folly of the capital allocators during this period was
| legendary.
| pwthornton wrote:
| It's incredible how easy it was to raise money in that time
| frame and how hard it is to raise money now. They would throw
| huge sums of money at you for the dumbest ideas.
|
| It's important to note that the AI Pin powered by ChatGPT was
| a bit of a pivot. If ChatGPT never came out, they wouldn't
| have even had that. It would have been more like having a
| dedicated Siri or Alexa device to do really basic stuff with.
| I can't imagine how much worse the product was going to be.
| What investor say that early pitch and work and was like,
| "sign me up?"
| moralestapia wrote:
| Even Perplexity got funding, so yeah, even an absolute
| piece of trash business can raise money with the right
| group of people.
| sumedh wrote:
| To be fair, it was not clear if ChatGpt will launch Web
| search or not.
|
| Perplexity investors probably think it will get acquired
| some day by some big co.
| rsynnott wrote:
| > It's incredible how easy it was to raise money in that
| time frame and how hard it is to raise money now. They
| would throw huge sums of money at you for the dumbest
| ideas.
|
| Humane's series C was in 2023, long after the end of ZIRP.
| They will still throw huge sums of money at you for the
| dumbest idea, provided that you say the magic term 'AI'
| enough.
| yalogin wrote:
| Did anyone think the ai pin would go any other way? This was
| bound to happen the moment it was announced. The rabbit and
| others are also probably heading in that direction. The hardware
| just isn't quite there yet and so is the software
| rsynnott wrote:
| It's also, well, unclear that it is a thing that anyone much
| _wants_. "What if a phone but with no screen and Siri listens
| to you constantly" just isn't an attractive proposition for
| most people.
| janalsncm wrote:
| This is really an advertisement for on-device ML. If shutting
| down the servers bricks your device, I'm less interested in
| expensive fledgling products.
| protimewaster wrote:
| I'm pretty amazed that they built a $700 device that can't do
| anything onboard beyond telling you what the battery level is.
|
| $700 hardware can't do more than that?
| MBCook wrote:
| To be fair it couldn't reliably do more than that _with_ the
| cloud.
| next_xibalba wrote:
| Dozens of worldwide users will be devastated by this news.
| MBCook wrote:
| I would absolutely love to know how many API requests they get
| a day from users who don't work at the company and aren't
| related to people who work at the company.
| encoderer wrote:
| Has the huge seed round thing _ever_ worked?
| FinnLobsien wrote:
| Mistral?
| encoderer wrote:
| Feels like their only hope is to be quasi-nationalized as THE
| European ai play.
|
| Maybe I missed something though.
| moralestapia wrote:
| Yeah, so ... no.
| natch wrote:
| I can imagine the conversation at the meetings:
|
| Humane rep: Here's what we can do. We can just shut it down. The
| fine print says we can.
|
| HP rep: Excellent! You'll fit right in here at HP!
| zombiwoof wrote:
| More like the HP rep saying "any chance we can still bill them
| 1 dollar a month ?"
| crowcroft wrote:
| Working at HP is the punishment for dumping this product onto
| people for $700.
| FinnLobsien wrote:
| While the device and company were clearly flawed and there wasn't
| even a tiny niche that seemed to love the product, some part of
| me admires their audacity in trying to do something
| transformational.
|
| There's a lot to post-mortem here, but failures like these are
| part of an entrepreneurial culture.
| gcanyon wrote:
| $116 million is a pretty nice payday for a product that never
| remotely lived up to the hype and had, by the end, negative
| numbers of customers.
| paxys wrote:
| Humane raised a total of $241M from VCs. It is pretty much
| guaranteed that no employee at the company, and not even the
| founders, will see a single dollar of that $116M. Investors
| always get first dibs.
| gcanyon wrote:
| Those are some sad numbers.
| zombiwoof wrote:
| Those founders milked their "ex Apple" creds to the limit. I
| was at Apple and they were just bozos
| sumedh wrote:
| Why was Imran fired from Apple?
| outside1234 wrote:
| Is Humane not a good enough explanation? :)
| latexr wrote:
| Are you saying Apple are bozos, or that you were at Apple
| at the same time the Humane founders were and they
| specifically were bozos?
| macintux wrote:
| Gruber reports an insider describing Chaudhri as a fraud.
|
| https://daringfireball.net/linked/2025/02/18/hp-buys-
| humane
| falcor84 wrote:
| >negative numbers of customers
|
| You're being facetious, right? Or is there indeed some
| definition of customers that allows for negative numbers?
| gcanyon wrote:
| Referring to the fact that they were apparently taking more
| returns than sales by the end. So not negative in total, but
| over a given timeframe. (hence: "by the end")
| falcor84 wrote:
| Ah, thanks for clarifying. Reminds me of that joke where a
| mathematician watches 2 people entering a house and then 3
| people leaving it, concluding that there's now -1 people in
| the house.
| gcanyon wrote:
| I _love_ jokes like that. There 's the one where a
| statistician goes hunting with a friend, and the friend
| shoots to the left of a target, then to the right, and
| the statistician excitedly cries, "Got 'em!"
| matheist wrote:
| I've heard it as "If someone goes in, then it'll be
| empty!"
| avalys wrote:
| No one is getting paid. Everyone involved is taking a loss.
| Humane turned $200M of venture capital into a $100M company. At
| best, some investors are getting $0.50 on the dollar.
| rvnx wrote:
| Do people in the company need to pay back their salaries ?
|
| I doubt so, that's 100M+ USD that disappeared.
| avalys wrote:
| This is a non sequitur. The original comment referred to
| the $116M HP paid to acquire the assets. None of that was
| paid to employees.
|
| Yes, Humane burned through $200M of investor capital, and
| some of it was spent on salaries for employees. The
| employees likely accepted lower cash salaries than were
| otherwise competitive, in exchange for equity which is now
| worthless. What is your point exactly?
|
| Are you suggesting the employees pulled a fast one somehow
| because the investors paid their salaries? That's,
| obviously, how venture-backed startups work, and everyone
| involved (especially the investors) is very aware of the
| trade. In exchange, the investors own much more of the
| company than the employees and have a much higher upside
| potential if the company succeeds.
| garciasn wrote:
| Honest question: isn't that really how 99.9999% of all
| startups are? Wouldn't those who chose to work at Humane
| realize the moon-shoot risks of working there? I have
| eschewed working at VC-backed startups for this very
| reason; if they're not self-sustaining they're a no-go
| for me. I don't play the lottery either; but, there are
| plenty of people who do for a 1 in a 400B chance at
| winning.
| avalys wrote:
| Yes, it absolutely is how all startups work.
| rvnx wrote:
| You can get hired at some startups but don't actually
| have to work very hard because you are friend with the
| founders, etc. So you become for example Executive
| Assistant, or some minor roles that have almost no
| reporting needed. It's more common than it seems.
|
| Of course if you are externally hired engineer it could
| be that you really have to do hard work, but, again, it
| depends.
| tummler wrote:
| "...$116 million..."
|
| _does spit-take_
| chipotle_coyote wrote:
| So if I'm reading this right, every single customer of Humane is
| going to have their device bricked in ten days? Wow, I bet both
| of them are going to be seriously pissed!
| peanuty1 wrote:
| And no refunds for purchases made before Nov 15, 2024.
| MBCook wrote:
| If you bought one anytime after the initial reviews just what
| were you doing?
|
| I just can't imagine there was anyone who both knew it
| existed and didn't know it was garbage.
|
| The only reason I can see anyone having bought one at that
| point is because they wanted to own an interesting little
| failure in gadget history. And even then just buy one used,
| there was no point in spending $700.
| throwaway48476 wrote:
| Some people collect failures.
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| Maybe they can hack it to redirect the requests to some
| little server that can relay their questions to chatgpt.
| Might be better than Humanes original backend!
| moose44 wrote:
| My thinking exactly. Would be a fun project.
| adolph wrote:
| the only question is if there were enough sold to build a
| community like the spotify carthing, which now sell on
| Ebay for more than their original msrp (not inflation
| adjusted)
|
| https://github.com/ItsRiprod/DeskThing
| MBCook wrote:
| Yep. I mentioned that. And that's a totally valid reason.
|
| But you knew it was a failure at that point, that's why
| you were buying it. You wouldn't have been expecting it
| to be a good product for the next couple of years.
| Otherwise you wouldn't have been interested.
| rurp wrote:
| I recall seeing a glowing article in Axios about the
| product and I wouldn't be surprised if there were similar
| posts in other publications. I was pretty skeptical for
| obvious reasons and expect most people were, but some
| people will uncritically believe what they read, especially
| about the hot business topic of the moment.
|
| Getting such articles written in the first place shows some
| level of business connections. I don't like that people
| will throw so much money away on hype, especially when so
| many useful products languish, but it's the world we live
| in.
| Gooblebrai wrote:
| "both of them?" What do you mean?
| tempodox wrote:
| > every single customer of Humane
| dcchambers wrote:
| I can't imagine that Humane has anything worth $100 million. HP
| just likes lighting money on fire I guess.
| thepasswordis wrote:
| I don't get it. Why did they not just sell this as a hardware
| device? The projector on it is cool. That _alone_ starts
| competing with my Apple Watch.
|
| These guys figured out an entire new category of hardware
| peripheral, and did what I understood to be some pretty cool
| engineering to make it work.
|
| WHY do people push this closed off ecosystem stuff? Seriously I
| do not get it.
| phonon wrote:
| Because they were selling it below cost? They needed the
| service fees for the company to be viable.
| thepasswordis wrote:
| So raise the cost until it's profitable and see who buys it.
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| Because it didn't really work on the hardware or software side.
| And it cost $700 which puts it into competition with some very
| powerful devices
| moralestapia wrote:
| Congrats on turning $230M USD into $116M USD.
|
| Sounds easy but it took 6 years of hard work!
| msephton wrote:
| It's phrased in a way that indicates the Humane brand and company
| is not part of the deal? Just assets (patents, software, staff)
| but not the name or brand? I would not be surprised if it rose
| from the ashes at some point.
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| That IP has negative value. Why would anyone want it?
| msephton wrote:
| I'd guess the founders want to keep it because of a sense of
| pride/attachment.
| Yizahi wrote:
| A perfect match :)
| zecg wrote:
| If you thought HP's crapware was insultingly bad before, wait
| until they start putting some 8b models trained on their
| marketing bullshit to helpfully shill wherever a sidebar can be
| planted.
| plagiarist wrote:
| "Don't you want to subscribe to your own printer? We'll
| reactivate this device after you subscribe to your own printer
| which you purchased."
| rsynnott wrote:
| HP, noted compulsive buyer of complete junk, in buying complete
| junk shocker (see Autonomy, Palm, etc).
| dcreater wrote:
| Palm was the opposite of complete junk. WebOS was absolutely
| ahead of its time back then and the pre devices were great
| _moof wrote:
| It may not have been technical junk but HP bought Palm three
| years after the iPhone came out. I loved my Palm Vx but that
| is truly hilarious timing. From a business perspective, in
| 2010 they were complete junk.
| lemonish97 wrote:
| To be fair, HP buying Compaq in the early 2000s was pretty
| huge, considering they are doing decently well today because of
| their PC market share.
| Sohcahtoa82 wrote:
| HP is a bizarre company.
|
| Like, I think they recognize that printing is a dying business.
| They want to pivot to something else, but they have no idea
| what to pivot to. They keep buying out other companies, but
| then effectively canceling the product.
| rchaud wrote:
| It's easy to point and laugh at a failed product with puzzling
| features, but I have respect for what Humane tried to do. They
| attempted to produce an AI product and get it to stand on its own
| two legs (metaphorically). They didn't have an annoying CEO
| grandstanding about the amazing tech while handwaving away
| hallucinations and common bugs, something Valley leadership does
| way too much of.
|
| They didn't start with a VC-friendly strategy of free-then-paid
| to acquire market share. There was an off-putting monthly
| subscription right at the start. No confusion about what this
| product's business model or target customer was.
|
| Contrast that to the ham-fisted way Apple, Android and Microsoft
| are attempting to bootstrap their AI offerings by jamming it into
| successful hardware products and sneaking users into it with dark
| patterns to opt them in.
| mathw wrote:
| I'll agree with you on that, but I think there's a really
| important thing that we have to also say about their business
| model: they developed and launched a product they knew couldn't
| live up to its billing or its price point. It shouldn't ever
| have made it beyond its conceptual investigation. Put it on the
| back burner, try again in five or ten years.
| rchaud wrote:
| >they developed and launched a product they knew couldn't
| live up to its billing or its price point
|
| Most of the tech sector has this problem, which is why they
| rug pull customers with the price the second the VC money
| dries up. We're inured to seeing 10-20% price increases every
| year for SaaS, because the acquisition price point was
| artifically low.
|
| I'm glad a company decided to just set a "market price" for
| once. Unfortunately it failed and rugpulled customers by
| doing so.
| miunau wrote:
| > They didn't have an annoying CEO grandstanding about the
| amazing tech while handwaving away hallucinations and common
| bugs, something Valley leadership does way too much of.
|
| I dunno:
|
| "Humane AI Pin founders banned internal criticism"
| https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2024/06/report-humane-ai-pin...
|
| "The Disappearing Computer -- and a World Where You Can Take AI
| Everywhere | Imran Chaudhri"
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMsQO5u7-NQ
| rchaud wrote:
| Given the contemporary hype level of consumer AI, this is
| well below my threshold for annoyance.
| dcrazy wrote:
| > They didn't have an annoying CEO grandstanding about the
| amazing tech while handwaving away hallucinations and common
| bugs, something Valley leadership does way too much of.
|
| Did you forget that they released a video that proudly
| demonstrated the AI pin hallucinating the date of the eclipse?
| They then went back and memory-holed the mistake:
| https://www.theverge.com/2023/11/13/23959473/humane-will-be-...
|
| In every single public appearance, Imran was clearly trying to
| project an image of some Zen master version of Steve Jobs. I
| think you have a massive misread of this company and the hubris
| of its founders.
| tofuahdude wrote:
| No, instead, they had two annoying CEOs who grandstanded their
| own egos.
| ndiddy wrote:
| >They didn't have an annoying CEO grandstanding about the
| amazing tech while handwaving away hallucinations and common
| bugs, something Valley leadership does way too much of.
|
| From The New York Times' coverage of the company
| (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/06/technology/humane-ai-
| pin....):
|
| > Many current and former employees said Mr. Chaudhri and Ms.
| Bongiorno preferred positivity over criticism, leading them to
| disregard warnings about the Ai Pin's poor battery life and
| power consumption. A senior software engineer was dismissed
| after raising questions about the product, they said, while
| others left out of frustration.
|
| > One [issue] was the device's laser display, which consumed
| tremendous power and would cause the pin to overheat. Before
| showing the gadget to prospective partners and investors,
| Humane executives often chilled it on ice packs so it would
| last longer, three people familiar with the demonstrations
| said.
|
| > When employees expressed concerns about the heat, they said,
| Humane's founders replied that software improvements reducing
| power use would fix it. Mr. Chaudhri, who led design, wanted to
| keep the gadget's sleek design, three people said.
|
| > In January, Humane laid off about 10 employees. A month
| later, a senior software engineer was let go after she
| questioned whether the Ai Pin would be ready by April. In a
| company meeting after the dismissal, Mr. Chaudhri and Ms.
| Bongiorno said the employee had violated policy by talking
| negatively about Humane, two attendees said.
| wruza wrote:
| A story that keeps delivering, thanks!
|
| Not even sure now if man is a fraud or a complete delulu.
| Angostura wrote:
| The main thing I'm sad about is that presumably their lovely
| custom font (Humane VF) will disapear. I covert it
| coffeebeqn wrote:
| If it's on the device can't you crack it open and grab it from
| the SD card or whatever storage they use? Given that it's going
| to be bricked anyway
| vednig wrote:
| Good Luck, HP trying to keep Humane afloat
| Havoc wrote:
| Can't wait for the inevitable AI enabled printers. Bonus points
| if it's a multimodal vision model and requires and dance per
| printed page. (Plus subscription ofc)
| skc wrote:
| This product, it's build-up and it's eventual unveiling
| legitimately felt like the very best of satirical comedy.
| wruza wrote:
| "HP jumps the train in a detached wagon."
|
| That thing failed to explain what it does and how. As one
| reviewer said, "with this battery, I can spend a whole day".
|
| Can't believe they managed to find someone to buy this nothing-
| burger for $100m+.
| teepo wrote:
| This reminds me a lot of the 3Com "Audrey" [0]. And of course HP
| now owns that as well. I have some bittersweet memories of
| hacking on that thing after the services were terminated. Maybe
| this could follow that afterlife legacy.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3Com_Audrey
| burnte wrote:
| I can't believe they were able to squeeze $118 million out of
| this scam. There ain't no justice.
| nashashmi wrote:
| I loved the interface Humane AI wanted the world to work through.
| But I hated the subscription fee, the lack of wifi, and the
| reliance on modem connectivity. It was supposed to be a wearable
| device (that connects to your phone). It was supposed to
| complement your smartwatch with an on-demand screen in the palm
| of your hands. It was supposed to be AI augmented, but not AI
| centered.
|
| I am glad someone will take the tech. But I am upset it is HP and
| I doubt they have a vision for the product.
| drowntoge wrote:
| The notion of a class-action lawsuit was born for this day.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-02-19 23:01 UTC)