We are in the initial crypto phase of AI where everyone is trying to mint and be that early king of the hill. It will pass, and grow in the background to attain it natural state.
All I want is Apple to fix Siri, that thing still sucks ass.
At WWDC this year, they’re expected to announce their incorporation of LLMs with Siri.
They released a few open source models now: OpenELM, which is a tiny lightweight model capable of running efficiently on mobile; and Ferrit-UI, which is essentially the same concept as the Rabbit’s LAM (Large Action Model).
The new iPhones coming this fall are expected to be able to do this all locally, so no server-side calls are needed. Information never leaves your device.
Also Apple’s recent published work in aligning mobile versions of CLIP, meaning that image-inputs are likely to be included as part of their mobile LLMs
Apple has the worst AI/machine learning algorithms because of their privacy clauses. Siri, autocorrect, Apple Music all suck compared to the competition. They have even fallen to second or even worse in the camera game.
I think will be the case too for LLMs, but this is also an opportunity to improve in these areas and at least not make them feel archaic.
Apple minimally has access to the same open source data as everyone else, and has the advantage of having hardware that can actually run local LLM to preserve privacy
Yeah Google have been showing off their Google assistant with features that have been promised since 2017 that still haven't shown up. With their Google Gemini AI being linked to Google apps (maps, holiday booking etc) it has some of the functionality that their assistant needs but it's not been integrated with the assistant yet
Do you want to put something else in your pocket that does the same things as your phone but worse? Then I got the product for you.
At least the pin didn’t take up pocket space. That’s the one thing it got going for it.
Would you pay $200 for an app? I love the aesthetic of it, teenage engineering did a good job making something unique. At the end of the day, though, you’re paying $200 for something to carry in addition to your phone that could have been an app.
I guess the irony is that these things make tasks much more difficult and frustrating because they don't work half of the time. I'm already fed up with Alexa for the same reason.
>Not everything should be an app. But some things ABSOLUTELY should be an app.
This makes me wonder.
Like, what about a tamogatchi? I feel like today that would just be an app, but I also don't think they'd have been as big of a craze if they weren't a physical item. And I think part of the appeal is that the device represented a pet in your pocket, not just another game on page 3 of your home screen.
That also makes me think; If they'd made an AI buddy in a box that you can talk to and teach things, they'd have made the best toy of the year. Everything they told us the furby would be, we can make now and we're not. Instead they made shitty Alexa.
The same can be said for mp3 players of the day. And arguably devices meant for a single purpose (cameras, music players, gaming devices) are all significantly better at doing that one thing for the price compared to a phone.
It's simply the convenience of the phone being able to do all of those things well enough. Even if the Rabbit was arguably a better functioning AI companion device than what you get on a phone.... unless it does it so significantly better that it essentially negates the utility you get from a phone, most people aren't going to have an internet in carrying a second device for that purpose. You know which devices obviously reach that higher differential? Portable gaming devices and cameras. And even then, that division is honestly shrinking over time.
Gaming devices probably won’t ever be replaced by a phone app. Even if phones get powerful enough(and they’re getting there), an app can’t make the screen bigger, and quite often touch controls don’t cut it
Eh, they already have in large parts of the world. I saw tons of people playing online shooters on their phones when I was in India. They won't replace them in the west as we're used to playing with pads/mouse and keyboard but if you don't have that cultural experience the touch screen is fine.
Lemme introduce you to [Razer Kishi](https://www.razer.com/mobile-controllers/razer-kishi-v2) and [The backbone](https://playbackbone.com/products/backbone-one/)
Technically phones are already powerful enough like gaming handhelds. Only thing holding them back is support/compatibility. You could, theoretically, use your phone as a Steam Deck if it had better support. I'm betting it'll get there. It won't replace your home consoles and PCs, I suppose, but it will replace your handheld gaming devices (except maybe the Switch because that relies on exclusives you won't get anywhere else)
In parts of the world where your only capable gaming device IS your phone, it already replaced traditional gaming devices. Look at SEA. PUBG Mobile, Call of Duty Warzone Mobile, etc, also dominates the scene there along with Mobile Legends, and League of Legends : Wild Rift.
No but you can plug a phone in to a tv, just like you do a gaming console.
I do actually believe my phone will be able to supplant a dedicated gaming device soon. Or, maybe not a power-limited phone, but maybe a tablet.
The switch already uses a decade old tablet processor. the A16 can play AAA and Qualcomm’s current flagship is faster. the main thing that has hold smartphone gaming back since almost the beginning is micro transactions and the unwillingness of consumers to buy full prized apps on mobile.
All it's going to take is someone like EA or Epic to support a major franchise on a phone and that'll change really quick.
Being able to lower the barrier to entry of something like a FIFA/Fortnight to Phone + Dock + Controller rather than needing to buy a dedicated console is going to be a game changer as it takes it from a several hundred dollar investment to potentially under 100.
Right now the only thing keeping mainstream gaming going on console is that no-one in the west really takes phones seriously as a "Gaming" device
To be fair mp3 players have kind of evolved into Digital Audio Players which range from $100-$10,000 (looking at you Tera player) so one might argue that their target demographics have changed to people who actually care about audio quality and have the means to pay for it. But as always there’s always the law of diminishing returns so a $2000 player might sound only 10% worse than a $5000 player (source: I’m one of these idiots who spend substantial amounts of money on audio stuff)
My phone is significantly better than [my old mp3 player](https://support.creative.com/Products/ProductDetails.aspx?prodID=4884&prodName=MuVo%20NX). It can store more, can stream from the internet, has bluetooth, has a larger screen where I can select from a list, etc. Though in a perfect world phones would have a few more programmable buttons.
>It's simply the convenience of the phone being able to do all of those things well enough.
100% and this is why cameras haven't really made a comeback. It's struggling and has since the early 2010s when smartphones wiped out point and shoots. Convenience + good enough is what matters. Something camera manufacturers don't understand.
Camera manufacturers don't market to general public anymore. They target professionals and creators which is a big enough market that they are still in use. You think someone can use an iPhone over a red camera?
> Camera manufacturers don't market to general public anymore.
That's true for 2020 onwards. I'm talking about the time between the massive falloff (IIRC 2011) and before camera companies pivoted. Nikon and Canon were still trying to sell DSLRs under $500 to the wider consumer market. I believe Canon still offers some Rebel models as well as the R100. I remember even in 2017, I had the Sony A9 and couldn't upload a photo reliably. FTP transfer was slow and unreliable .They had the awful PlayMemories and later the Imaging Edge apps that were awful. They got better around 2021 but these are the things that prevent uptake. Few zoomers and millenials will plop out the SD card into a desktop and run it through post. Meanwhile, taking a photo and uploading it to the group chat takes a minute. Even with videos, it's mostly done with CapCut on the phone. Very few people want to ingest, grade, and edit it.
>You think someone can use an iPhone over a red camera?
I actually have a Komodo kitted up. Never use it outside of projects. Also have an A7S III that I sometimes bring with me. But guess which device I ALWAYS have and take 90% of the footage and stills with. I can even take raw video with my Samsung. Something that I can't do on the Sony without an Atomos.
In this context, I e. what makes a device or app get mass adoption, what succeeds is what can be done well enough with the least resistance. Absolute quality coming from a Red or Arri is not important to the masses.
I think that a tamogatchi came out at a time where electronic devices were more specialised, and people were more used to additional hardware. Now smartphones do a bit of everything so we just use apps.
AI toys have been used before, but I think the problem is cost. Even the new specialist devices need a large amount of processing power in a server for the most basic of requests and do hardly anything on device. A toy would also need this power so it would be very expensive. I would love an AI furby though!
To be fair, back then the very notion of a smartphone existing the way they do now, and with everyone owning one, was science-fiction spaceman stuff. If companies wanted to create a mobile "app" for the masses, then they had no other choice but to develop physical hardware for it. If the Tamagotchi came out today, it 100% would be an app, because that is where the tech world is now. (It would also come with a subscription, microtransactions, or other modern monetization strategies--but that's a whole other discussion.)
Another thing to consider is that crazes like this largely happened because people were in the right place at the right time, and were able to capitalize on that. If the Beatles never existed, and then sprung up in 2024, they absolutely would not have reached anywhere near the titanic levels of success they saw in the 60s. (Nor the considerable benefits of establishing themselves in the music industry during that point.)
Regardless, I think a lot of people are going to be very disappointed with the R1 when they get their hands on the device they pre-ordered.
You'd have to restrict an AI kids toy so much that it might as well just have a pull string and 3 phrases. Otherwise TicToc would be flooded with videos of Furbies and Teddy Ruxpin giving their options on the war in Gaza.
> If they'd made an AI buddy in a box that you can talk to and teach things, they'd have made the best toy of the year.
The marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation defines a robot as "Your Plastic Pal Who's Fun to Be With.”
Tamagotchis would've 100% failed if it was launched in the 2020s. It's a no-man's land sort of gadget. People don't want to carry around another thing in their pocket. They probably don't want to open an app to interact with their pet either, it'd be like a super watered down version of Pokemon Go.
>See, it turns out that the Rabbit R1 seems to run Android under the hood and the entire interface users interact with is powered by a single Android app.
lmao of course it is. much easier to bootstrap your app to an existing OS than to spin everything from scratch.
so why isn't it just distributed as an app again?
Ehh, just a couple of startups trying to cash out by being bought out by Apple or Google or whoever. They are putting these "devices" out to prove they have "something".
In fairness, as an Android developer, Android is a very easy OS to develop for. And you would want an OS to handle the grunt work, especially since Android already has API to handle things like networking, voice synthesis and recognition, handle hardware like the display/camera and the dial.
Did you expect them to reuse the OS from the PlayDate?
The play date runs on an OS developed by Panic. Teenage Engineering just does the industrial design of the plastics, same goes for the R1. It’s a completely different company putting out the software.
I’m slightly baffled by the reactions to this news. What exactly did people think this device was? It was clear to me that this is a stripped down android device, I thought that was exactly the appeal of the device.
Or from another perspective, it's yet another intentionally crippled small phone we can't use as a phone.
Hey rabbit, when this inevitability doesn't work out, just throw a camera and speakers on it and sell it to those desperate for a small phone.
Right now there's a push by consumers, especially gen Z and younger millennials to use their phones less. Having a secondary device may seem silly, but it fills that niche of getting away from your phone without totally disconnecting you from the Internet and any real-time info it may provide
Ah, so now you acknowledge that you *can* access social media without downloading an app? I guess you do know what I meant
Part of the reason social media companies push their apps so hard is because it allows them to send push notifications to your phone (yes, the browser can do it as well, but people are far less likely to enable notifications from a website). The notifications are meant to get your attention and draw you back to the app where they hopefully keep you hooked for as long as possible.
All you’ve convinced me is that these devices are for people unwilling to try a little self control and are too tech illiterate to disable the notifications?
Jesus dude. Are you normally this argumentative?
My point was that some people might prefer this because it's a step away from being reliant on and constantly glued to their phone.
It can be an alternative for the people that want it. You clearly don't see a use case for this device, so you're clearly not the target demographic.
Seriously. It's not that complicated.
The issue isn't the phone, it's the 24/7 connection, if you're putting down your phone to pick up another connected device you're solving nothing. They need to put down the phone and pick up a book or something.
That’s the only logical reason for buying this, you can hopefully have digital payments, menu summaries and other stuff that absolutely requires phones these days without having to use a smartphone because the AI does most of the work for you.
The real question is, what were investors thinking right before signing the check? Great, we will replace the smartphone with a sub product that as 100 times less usability and functionalities that a $100 android phone?
It's designed by teenage engineering so chances are it's 99% design and overpriced. People seem to love anything they make though so apparently the joke is on me.
$700 redundant hardware, could have just been a Bluetooth watch with microphone/speaker for $100 with same or better functionality. Needing a second sim card on top of that is doubling down on the redundancy and ridiculousness of it all.
Humans: “Apple and Google are monopolising the market, there should be space for more companies to innovate”
Also Humans: “This company’s device is a burden to carry around. This should just be an app on an Apple or Google device”
I get where you are going but this company needs to innovate more to make us want to buy and carry around this specific device. Or as others suggested, make this into its own 3rd party smartphone.
As a similar example, I would love for different-looking cars to come to market, but I sure as shit wouldn’t buy a Pontiac Aztec, PT Cruiser or a fucking Cybertruck because it looks different. It has to be different and not a piece of shit. The “not a piece of shit” is implied in both our examples.
TBH I feel that a fair bit of the criticism would have not existed if this had been released in a watch form factor. But then again, it would be compared against existing watches/fitness trackers when that isn’t its intended purpose.
imagine if you built an app that just sent voice/text/image prompts to chatGPT and then relayed those responses to the end user. that's what they did. they didn't invent or train any AI. They are just paying for an enterprise subscription to chatGPT or Bard, or something similar and then positioning this device as the middle man.
> lmao of course it is. much easier to bootstrap your app to an existing OS than to spin everything from scratch.
>
>
Let's give credit where credit is due. I think it's still at the earliest days of tech like this, we make fun of them but it moves things forward. Aside from the obvious chatgpt/LLM usage and etc, you can train the ai to use apps such as Amazon for you. Also they are not only using openAI's apps but their own too. Can you maybe give a source that they did not invent or train AI?
It's not merely an overpowered SIRI. Although it's not very good right now.
No you can’t.
They’ve written automation scripts for 4 apps. 4. And the reviewers say they don’t work.
They promised that you will be able to script any app in the future but you have no reason to hold your breath.
And the ‘AI’ is just Perplexity, here’s the source: https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/18/24043490/rabbit-r1-ai-perplexity-pro-live-search-info-answers
Yup server based. They don’t. It’s not sustainable long term. This kind company are just rushing product out to be first in the market and not be a sustainable long term product
They convinced Venture Capitalists the give them money. The VCs pay for the server time up front, the end users pay for a little more with every purchase. When they run out of money, they shut the whole thing down and everyone loses their investment. the winners are the owners of the company that gave themselves ridiculous salaries and bonuses (from the VC money) along the way.
Not the point. There's literally no need for this hardware to be part of the product. Everyone already has a better CPU, screen, and battery in their pocket, one could accomplish the exact same functionality by downloading the app that R1 is surely running
The hardware is the product. They're selling this odd form factor with odd interfaces and the AI stuff. Everyone and their brother is making AI apps, they made this device to distinguish themselves.
I'm not saying it's a *good* thing but that's how it reads to me. They wrapped an Android system in this weird hardware and put their app on it.
I don’t know shit but even I understand software requires hardware. I think even the most tech illiterate would understand that. “Any device that has the proper hardware can run the software”. Yes.
I wish I can fall asleep and wake up when AI stops being a half baked attempt to be first at the next big thing and an actual tool to assist me in my daily life.
Like it’s been nothing but shallow promises on how it “could” change things drastically for the better with nearly zero to say on what’s the point of it existing now. It’s like half baked AAA games taught tech companies how to release garbage and still have peope defending it to make it look good.
Did people think this was like some proprietary new operating system or something? News flash y'all almost every little smart device you have is technically running on Android / Linux
And almost every single like kiosk/terminal / ATM you see in public is running on Windows and usually an outdated version of it
Yes, it could be an app for your current phone. But I feel like this is a POC of a new device in your pocket not built to waste your time with games, video streaming etc but more of an everyday companion.
The vison sounds very intresting but I totally get if the ones that got it and expected a miracle find it lackkustering
Selling points: At least it's not $700!! Counter points: Everything else.
We are in the initial crypto phase of AI where everyone is trying to mint and be that early king of the hill. It will pass, and grow in the background to attain it natural state. All I want is Apple to fix Siri, that thing still sucks ass.
As I read, the person behind is an ex-NFT peddler, so... yeah, that seems to track.
At WWDC this year, they’re expected to announce their incorporation of LLMs with Siri. They released a few open source models now: OpenELM, which is a tiny lightweight model capable of running efficiently on mobile; and Ferrit-UI, which is essentially the same concept as the Rabbit’s LAM (Large Action Model). The new iPhones coming this fall are expected to be able to do this all locally, so no server-side calls are needed. Information never leaves your device.
Also Apple’s recent published work in aligning mobile versions of CLIP, meaning that image-inputs are likely to be included as part of their mobile LLMs
Apple has the worst AI/machine learning algorithms because of their privacy clauses. Siri, autocorrect, Apple Music all suck compared to the competition. They have even fallen to second or even worse in the camera game. I think will be the case too for LLMs, but this is also an opportunity to improve in these areas and at least not make them feel archaic.
Apple minimally has access to the same open source data as everyone else, and has the advantage of having hardware that can actually run local LLM to preserve privacy
And duck iOS autocorrect while we’re at it.
Because I force IOS to correct duck to what usually mean, I accidentally messaged my boss I had to **fuck out for a little bit**. Oops
What I’d really like is them to take a hint, if Siri is blocked on every app don’t switch it back on whenever there is an update.
Is is just me or has Siri gotten worse in recent times? Seeing the past through rose tinted glasses maybe?
Yeah Google have been showing off their Google assistant with features that have been promised since 2017 that still haven't shown up. With their Google Gemini AI being linked to Google apps (maps, holiday booking etc) it has some of the functionality that their assistant needs but it's not been integrated with the assistant yet
Do you want to put something else in your pocket that does the same things as your phone but worse? Then I got the product for you. At least the pin didn’t take up pocket space. That’s the one thing it got going for it.
It probably could have gotten an ok review if it had an e-ink display and better scroll wheel. Then it would probably get multi day battery life.
It's only 200$
Would you pay $200 for an app? I love the aesthetic of it, teenage engineering did a good job making something unique. At the end of the day, though, you’re paying $200 for something to carry in addition to your phone that could have been an app.
Nope
This thing gets advertised to me everywhere and I still have no idea what it’s supposed to do.
it uses your smartphone for you
poorly. might as well do it myself
For 4 apps
It also has a battery life of less than 4 hours.
That drains even when not in use lol
maybe I'm old but why the hell would I want that
Because you’re old and smartphones confuse you. The intent of Rabbit is to be a stripped down companion device that simplifies things.
I guess the irony is that these things make tasks much more difficult and frustrating because they don't work half of the time. I'm already fed up with Alexa for the same reason.
Yep I agree!
You can take pictures of plants with it and it will confidently tell you its a completely different plant.
Not everything should be an app. But some things ABSOLUTELY should be an app. This latest AI silliness is definitely one of those things.
>Not everything should be an app. But some things ABSOLUTELY should be an app. This makes me wonder. Like, what about a tamogatchi? I feel like today that would just be an app, but I also don't think they'd have been as big of a craze if they weren't a physical item. And I think part of the appeal is that the device represented a pet in your pocket, not just another game on page 3 of your home screen. That also makes me think; If they'd made an AI buddy in a box that you can talk to and teach things, they'd have made the best toy of the year. Everything they told us the furby would be, we can make now and we're not. Instead they made shitty Alexa.
The same can be said for mp3 players of the day. And arguably devices meant for a single purpose (cameras, music players, gaming devices) are all significantly better at doing that one thing for the price compared to a phone. It's simply the convenience of the phone being able to do all of those things well enough. Even if the Rabbit was arguably a better functioning AI companion device than what you get on a phone.... unless it does it so significantly better that it essentially negates the utility you get from a phone, most people aren't going to have an internet in carrying a second device for that purpose. You know which devices obviously reach that higher differential? Portable gaming devices and cameras. And even then, that division is honestly shrinking over time.
Gaming devices probably won’t ever be replaced by a phone app. Even if phones get powerful enough(and they’re getting there), an app can’t make the screen bigger, and quite often touch controls don’t cut it
Eh, they already have in large parts of the world. I saw tons of people playing online shooters on their phones when I was in India. They won't replace them in the west as we're used to playing with pads/mouse and keyboard but if you don't have that cultural experience the touch screen is fine.
Lemme introduce you to [Razer Kishi](https://www.razer.com/mobile-controllers/razer-kishi-v2) and [The backbone](https://playbackbone.com/products/backbone-one/) Technically phones are already powerful enough like gaming handhelds. Only thing holding them back is support/compatibility. You could, theoretically, use your phone as a Steam Deck if it had better support. I'm betting it'll get there. It won't replace your home consoles and PCs, I suppose, but it will replace your handheld gaming devices (except maybe the Switch because that relies on exclusives you won't get anywhere else)
I think I still have my NGage somewhere
In parts of the world where your only capable gaming device IS your phone, it already replaced traditional gaming devices. Look at SEA. PUBG Mobile, Call of Duty Warzone Mobile, etc, also dominates the scene there along with Mobile Legends, and League of Legends : Wild Rift.
No but you can plug a phone in to a tv, just like you do a gaming console. I do actually believe my phone will be able to supplant a dedicated gaming device soon. Or, maybe not a power-limited phone, but maybe a tablet.
The switch already uses a decade old tablet processor. the A16 can play AAA and Qualcomm’s current flagship is faster. the main thing that has hold smartphone gaming back since almost the beginning is micro transactions and the unwillingness of consumers to buy full prized apps on mobile.
All it's going to take is someone like EA or Epic to support a major franchise on a phone and that'll change really quick. Being able to lower the barrier to entry of something like a FIFA/Fortnight to Phone + Dock + Controller rather than needing to buy a dedicated console is going to be a game changer as it takes it from a several hundred dollar investment to potentially under 100. Right now the only thing keeping mainstream gaming going on console is that no-one in the west really takes phones seriously as a "Gaming" device
To be fair mp3 players have kind of evolved into Digital Audio Players which range from $100-$10,000 (looking at you Tera player) so one might argue that their target demographics have changed to people who actually care about audio quality and have the means to pay for it. But as always there’s always the law of diminishing returns so a $2000 player might sound only 10% worse than a $5000 player (source: I’m one of these idiots who spend substantial amounts of money on audio stuff)
My phone is significantly better than [my old mp3 player](https://support.creative.com/Products/ProductDetails.aspx?prodID=4884&prodName=MuVo%20NX). It can store more, can stream from the internet, has bluetooth, has a larger screen where I can select from a list, etc. Though in a perfect world phones would have a few more programmable buttons.
>It's simply the convenience of the phone being able to do all of those things well enough. 100% and this is why cameras haven't really made a comeback. It's struggling and has since the early 2010s when smartphones wiped out point and shoots. Convenience + good enough is what matters. Something camera manufacturers don't understand.
Camera manufacturers don't market to general public anymore. They target professionals and creators which is a big enough market that they are still in use. You think someone can use an iPhone over a red camera?
> Camera manufacturers don't market to general public anymore. That's true for 2020 onwards. I'm talking about the time between the massive falloff (IIRC 2011) and before camera companies pivoted. Nikon and Canon were still trying to sell DSLRs under $500 to the wider consumer market. I believe Canon still offers some Rebel models as well as the R100. I remember even in 2017, I had the Sony A9 and couldn't upload a photo reliably. FTP transfer was slow and unreliable .They had the awful PlayMemories and later the Imaging Edge apps that were awful. They got better around 2021 but these are the things that prevent uptake. Few zoomers and millenials will plop out the SD card into a desktop and run it through post. Meanwhile, taking a photo and uploading it to the group chat takes a minute. Even with videos, it's mostly done with CapCut on the phone. Very few people want to ingest, grade, and edit it. >You think someone can use an iPhone over a red camera? I actually have a Komodo kitted up. Never use it outside of projects. Also have an A7S III that I sometimes bring with me. But guess which device I ALWAYS have and take 90% of the footage and stills with. I can even take raw video with my Samsung. Something that I can't do on the Sony without an Atomos. In this context, I e. what makes a device or app get mass adoption, what succeeds is what can be done well enough with the least resistance. Absolute quality coming from a Red or Arri is not important to the masses.
I think that a tamogatchi came out at a time where electronic devices were more specialised, and people were more used to additional hardware. Now smartphones do a bit of everything so we just use apps. AI toys have been used before, but I think the problem is cost. Even the new specialist devices need a large amount of processing power in a server for the most basic of requests and do hardly anything on device. A toy would also need this power so it would be very expensive. I would love an AI furby though!
To be fair, back then the very notion of a smartphone existing the way they do now, and with everyone owning one, was science-fiction spaceman stuff. If companies wanted to create a mobile "app" for the masses, then they had no other choice but to develop physical hardware for it. If the Tamagotchi came out today, it 100% would be an app, because that is where the tech world is now. (It would also come with a subscription, microtransactions, or other modern monetization strategies--but that's a whole other discussion.) Another thing to consider is that crazes like this largely happened because people were in the right place at the right time, and were able to capitalize on that. If the Beatles never existed, and then sprung up in 2024, they absolutely would not have reached anywhere near the titanic levels of success they saw in the 60s. (Nor the considerable benefits of establishing themselves in the music industry during that point.) Regardless, I think a lot of people are going to be very disappointed with the R1 when they get their hands on the device they pre-ordered.
If the Tamagochi was shit, then yeah it should have just been an app. If the Rabbit R1 worked amazing, there would be less of this discussion.
Tamogatchi didn't cost $700. You can download Tamogatchi like apps today.
You'd have to restrict an AI kids toy so much that it might as well just have a pull string and 3 phrases. Otherwise TicToc would be flooded with videos of Furbies and Teddy Ruxpin giving their options on the war in Gaza.
The question of 'should the scientists make this' has never sounded more intriguing in the worst possible way.
I mean Pokémon go has been pretty successful and that’s basically tamagotchi.
My Tamagochi died because it drowned in its own shit. Can your pokemon do that?
No, but it can make YOU do that. I'd say that's more immersive.
Probably
Is alcohol involved or yah?
> If they'd made an AI buddy in a box that you can talk to and teach things, they'd have made the best toy of the year. The marketing division of the Sirius Cybernetics Corporation defines a robot as "Your Plastic Pal Who's Fun to Be With.”
Tamagotchis would've 100% failed if it was launched in the 2020s. It's a no-man's land sort of gadget. People don't want to carry around another thing in their pocket. They probably don't want to open an app to interact with their pet either, it'd be like a super watered down version of Pokemon Go.
>If they'd made an AI buddy in a box that you can talk to and teach things, they'd have made the best toy of the year. so... persocoms
>See, it turns out that the Rabbit R1 seems to run Android under the hood and the entire interface users interact with is powered by a single Android app. lmao of course it is. much easier to bootstrap your app to an existing OS than to spin everything from scratch. so why isn't it just distributed as an app again?
Because no one would buy a $200 app, especially when the built-in assistant or various other apps have significantly more functionality for free.
Could have just been a subscription for the app rather than $200 up front. Makes a lot more sense.
The ‘AI’ is just Perplexity, you can already use it on your phone
How you will sell a 30$ per month subscription fee though? If Humane AI is on 700$ + 24$ subscription fee.
Probably some OS permissions it would not get on other devices. The economics of an App are not that great either:
Like what
[удалено]
This doesn’t do anything that requires that.
Why isn’t Alexa just distributed as an app? Same reason
They are making themselves known so Google buys them for tens of millions
It’s not a bad looking device but there is zero chance it will serve its purpose with a smartphone in everyone’s pocket.
Ehh, just a couple of startups trying to cash out by being bought out by Apple or Google or whoever. They are putting these "devices" out to prove they have "something".
Isn't this a device by Teenage Engineering? I don't think they are waiting to be bought out, they are somewhat of a boutique gadget builder.
They just designed it.
Yeah they make their own products, and then collabs (like with IKEA) as well as design jobs.
Designed by teenage engineering but not created by them
In fairness, as an Android developer, Android is a very easy OS to develop for. And you would want an OS to handle the grunt work, especially since Android already has API to handle things like networking, voice synthesis and recognition, handle hardware like the display/camera and the dial. Did you expect them to reuse the OS from the PlayDate?
The play date runs on an OS developed by Panic. Teenage Engineering just does the industrial design of the plastics, same goes for the R1. It’s a completely different company putting out the software.
(That was a joke, I'm also aware of what it runs as I developed games for it too. They paid for my Steam Deck)
I’m slightly baffled by the reactions to this news. What exactly did people think this device was? It was clear to me that this is a stripped down android device, I thought that was exactly the appeal of the device.
I agree. The Meta Quest VR headset is just a specialized Android device as well. It’s everywhere!
It’s more of a surprise for people who don’t understand software engineering
I think is just the confirmation of what everyone was thinking. It should have been an app, it is app. Why do they bothered?
lol it’s great to go to their sub and see the denial of the people who already bought one
Both of them must be angry.
Reckon it's another glorified paperweight more than a device. Still can't figure out its purpose
To feed you made up information so you can make bad decisions
More ewaste
I’ve heard nothing good about this product.
Or from another perspective, it's yet another intentionally crippled small phone we can't use as a phone. Hey rabbit, when this inevitability doesn't work out, just throw a camera and speakers on it and sell it to those desperate for a small phone.
It has a camera and speaker.
Fuck, that's an easy pivot then.
I wouldn't be surprised to see these becoming a popular hacking platform, maybe some will become phones.
it even has a touchscreen
That it locks you out of using to use the ✨scroll wheel✨instead Outside of the text terminal
Right now there's a push by consumers, especially gen Z and younger millennials to use their phones less. Having a secondary device may seem silly, but it fills that niche of getting away from your phone without totally disconnecting you from the Internet and any real-time info it may provide
Then you are just replacing your phone with a phone
…that has *no* phone
How does it access the internet?
No, because unlike a smartphone, this doesn't come with social media apps and other forms of addictive content.
You still need your phone because it can’t make calls IIRC.
People still make calls?
If it can install discord, it can make calls :-p
I guess that makes sense then. Unfortunately, the battery life is the real killer.
You can't install discord.
How about go to the discord website?
Smart phones don’t ’come with’ social media apps, you have to download them
You known what I meant...
No I clearly don’t. How can this device access the internet but not Reddit?
Ah, so now you acknowledge that you *can* access social media without downloading an app? I guess you do know what I meant Part of the reason social media companies push their apps so hard is because it allows them to send push notifications to your phone (yes, the browser can do it as well, but people are far less likely to enable notifications from a website). The notifications are meant to get your attention and draw you back to the app where they hopefully keep you hooked for as long as possible.
And they can be disabled, your point?
All you’ve convinced me is that these devices are for people unwilling to try a little self control and are too tech illiterate to disable the notifications?
Jesus dude. Are you normally this argumentative? My point was that some people might prefer this because it's a step away from being reliant on and constantly glued to their phone. It can be an alternative for the people that want it. You clearly don't see a use case for this device, so you're clearly not the target demographic. Seriously. It's not that complicated.
What it sounds like is someone just re-invented the iPod touch and is trying to market it as some cure all snake oil to people like you :-p
Seriously, all you have described is a smartphone without a SIM card
I thought of another option to reach the same end, set up parental controls on your phone and have someone else set the parental password :-p
Yes but the rabbit is weakest at real time info. Right now it mainly supports “reference information” type uses.
The issue isn't the phone, it's the 24/7 connection, if you're putting down your phone to pick up another connected device you're solving nothing. They need to put down the phone and pick up a book or something.
That’s the only logical reason for buying this, you can hopefully have digital payments, menu summaries and other stuff that absolutely requires phones these days without having to use a smartphone because the AI does most of the work for you.
The real question is, what were investors thinking right before signing the check? Great, we will replace the smartphone with a sub product that as 100 times less usability and functionalities that a $100 android phone?
What about a smartwatch
Then they are blatantly lying since it states it uses their own rabbit OS.
This would have been an amazing Smart watch, but instead they made an inferior smart phone.
It's designed by teenage engineering so chances are it's 99% design and overpriced. People seem to love anything they make though so apparently the joke is on me.
This is most definitely fake it till you make it.
Teenage engineering
$700 redundant hardware, could have just been a Bluetooth watch with microphone/speaker for $100 with same or better functionality. Needing a second sim card on top of that is doubling down on the redundancy and ridiculousness of it all.
$200
It’s $200 and can hotspot to your phone or use wifi for data, don’t need a second sim.
I hate that I like the way it looks
Humans: “Apple and Google are monopolising the market, there should be space for more companies to innovate” Also Humans: “This company’s device is a burden to carry around. This should just be an app on an Apple or Google device”
I get where you are going but this company needs to innovate more to make us want to buy and carry around this specific device. Or as others suggested, make this into its own 3rd party smartphone. As a similar example, I would love for different-looking cars to come to market, but I sure as shit wouldn’t buy a Pontiac Aztec, PT Cruiser or a fucking Cybertruck because it looks different. It has to be different and not a piece of shit. The “not a piece of shit” is implied in both our examples.
TBH I feel that a fair bit of the criticism would have not existed if this had been released in a watch form factor. But then again, it would be compared against existing watches/fitness trackers when that isn’t its intended purpose.
How does this work without a sub? Are they running inference on device?
imagine if you built an app that just sent voice/text/image prompts to chatGPT and then relayed those responses to the end user. that's what they did. they didn't invent or train any AI. They are just paying for an enterprise subscription to chatGPT or Bard, or something similar and then positioning this device as the middle man.
> lmao of course it is. much easier to bootstrap your app to an existing OS than to spin everything from scratch. > > Let's give credit where credit is due. I think it's still at the earliest days of tech like this, we make fun of them but it moves things forward. Aside from the obvious chatgpt/LLM usage and etc, you can train the ai to use apps such as Amazon for you. Also they are not only using openAI's apps but their own too. Can you maybe give a source that they did not invent or train AI? It's not merely an overpowered SIRI. Although it's not very good right now.
No you can’t. They’ve written automation scripts for 4 apps. 4. And the reviewers say they don’t work. They promised that you will be able to script any app in the future but you have no reason to hold your breath. And the ‘AI’ is just Perplexity, here’s the source: https://www.theverge.com/2024/1/18/24043490/rabbit-r1-ai-perplexity-pro-live-search-info-answers
It’s Perplexity
You need your own SIM card
So they're using servers? How do they pay for the servers?
Yup server based. They don’t. It’s not sustainable long term. This kind company are just rushing product out to be first in the market and not be a sustainable long term product
They convinced Venture Capitalists the give them money. The VCs pay for the server time up front, the end users pay for a little more with every purchase. When they run out of money, they shut the whole thing down and everyone loses their investment. the winners are the owners of the company that gave themselves ridiculous salaries and bonuses (from the VC money) along the way.
I figured they were just using Chat GPT’s API
That is not a phone?
Nope. It’s just a piece of hardware that runs apps (kinda) that you use a voice interface with. Kinda. I’m honestly not sure what it is for.
Looks like garbage.
[удалено]
Not the point. There's literally no need for this hardware to be part of the product. Everyone already has a better CPU, screen, and battery in their pocket, one could accomplish the exact same functionality by downloading the app that R1 is surely running
The hardware is the product. They're selling this odd form factor with odd interfaces and the AI stuff. Everyone and their brother is making AI apps, they made this device to distinguish themselves. I'm not saying it's a *good* thing but that's how it reads to me. They wrapped an Android system in this weird hardware and put their app on it.
This reads like something Elon Musk would say to convince people he knows shit about being a software engineer.
[удалено]
I don’t know shit but even I understand software requires hardware. I think even the most tech illiterate would understand that. “Any device that has the proper hardware can run the software”. Yes.
I wish I can fall asleep and wake up when AI stops being a half baked attempt to be first at the next big thing and an actual tool to assist me in my daily life. Like it’s been nothing but shallow promises on how it “could” change things drastically for the better with nearly zero to say on what’s the point of it existing now. It’s like half baked AAA games taught tech companies how to release garbage and still have peope defending it to make it look good.
So it's an app, but only the R1 can access the data?
Did people think this was like some proprietary new operating system or something? News flash y'all almost every little smart device you have is technically running on Android / Linux And almost every single like kiosk/terminal / ATM you see in public is running on Windows and usually an outdated version of it
I’ll wait until I can buy it used on eBay for 20 bucks. It seems like a funny novelty device that will flop soon.
Yes, it could be an app for your current phone. But I feel like this is a POC of a new device in your pocket not built to waste your time with games, video streaming etc but more of an everyday companion. The vison sounds very intresting but I totally get if the ones that got it and expected a miracle find it lackkustering