It's no secret that Android users are money tight compared to Apple users. It makes sense to start on iOs and gauge subscribers before spending additional resources on making another app

Very impressive for just 4 people. What's the team background and how long have you been working on this?

I'm not part of their team, but lived with them for a couple months. They've been working on it for ~5 months, and their background is 16-20 year olds who are too smart for university.

For a rag-tag group of transcendental audiophiles operating electronic circuitry, it ionizes and atomizes well.

They are a team of 4. At that size, it's better for them to be focused on one thing than stretched out

Eh, that depends. A small model that's voice-and-text is probably more useful to most people than scaling up a voice-only model: the large voice-only model will have to compete on intelligence with e.g. Qwen and Llama, since it can't be used in conjunction with them; whereas a small voice+text model can be used as a cheap frontend hiding a larger, smarter, but more expensive text-only model behind it. This is an 8b model: running it is nearly free, it can fit on a 4090 with room to spare.

On the one hand, a small team focused on voice-to-voice could probably do a lot better at voice-to-voice than a small team focused on voice-to-voice+text. But a small team focused on making the most useful model would probably do better at that goal by focusing on voice+text rather than voice-only.

Their goal is not working on what's most useful for most people though. That's the domain of the big AI players. They are small and so specialising works best as that's where they can have an edge as a company.

At the end of the day, the released product needs to be good and needs to be done in a reasonable amount of time. I highly doubt they can do a generic model as well as a more specialised one.

But if you think you know better than them, you could try to contact them even though it looks they are crazy laser focused (their public email addresses are either for investors or employee candidates).

> Path forward requires solving the core challenge: actually surfacing the content people want to see, not what intermiediaries want them to see

But this will never happen with mainstream search imo. It is not a technical problem but a human one. As long as there is a human in control of what gets surfaced, it is only a matter of time until you revert to tampered search. Humans are not robots. They have emotions and can be swayed with or without their awareness. And this is a form of power for the swayer as much as oil or water are.

The idea that you can have an AI system provide factual and reliable answers to human centric questions is as real as Star Trek itself.

You will never remove the human factor from AI

Your hope might be that a technical solution is found for a human problem but that is unlikely.

By that token, you could find non-human animals that are smarter than some percentage of humanity in a few tasks. Are those animals AGI?

Now you could find a software that is smarter than some percentage of humanity in a few tasks. Is that software AGI? Is AlphaGo AGI? Is the Google Deep mind AI gamer AGI?

Not even that. You might want it to win, not care about the outcome or not think that it will win without putting the US through a long depression, in all those cases it makes US officials reluctant to put themselves in such vulnerable position especially given the new rising world powers

> At geological or biological timescales, that’s what the emergence of language did

Elaborate on this idea please. Are you saying that human languages are self-replicating abstract entities?

The singularity is always just around the corner. It's like a whale in a casino. The big reward is always just around the corner. You need to drop a few more coins and soon you will be rich

They own the OS. They don't need to break it to access your passwords

It means Apple. See: "Are you sure Apple can’t read them too?".

Next time you insult someone, better use your cognition powers to avoid looking like that which you call others

My bad, I didn't mean to insult you. I meant it as a criticism

By GP, u/blitzar's comment, my cognition tells me that his comment meant anyone can break AES 256-bit encryption, including Apple, but in this context, he could have meant everyone else

You know this future isn't happening anytime soon. Certainly not in the next 100 years. Until then, humans will be taking care of it and no one will want to work at a place working on some Fransketeinian codebase made via an LLM. And even when humans are only working on 5% of the codebase, that will likely be the most critical bit and will have the same problems regarding staff recruitment and retention.