正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

The iPhone will still be relevant for four years. Apple has every year planned out until the iPhone goes away. Monday is the first of four planned keynotes. 2023: ugly device with cord. 2024: beautiful device with no cord. 2025: glasses. 2026: glasses that fix your eyes. 2027: glasses...

742,190 次观看 • 3 年前 •via X (Twitter)

10 条评论

Elon Musk 的头像
Elon Musk3 年前

Neuralink

Robert Scoble 的头像
Robert Scoble3 年前

What year?

Blake McCorkle 🌻 的头像
Blake McCorkle 🌻3 年前

That's a crazy hardware dev cycle - 4 years. Zuckerberg's biggest mistake was not purchasing a semiconductor factory 10 years ago

Robert Scoble 的头像
Robert Scoble3 年前

Yes.

AI Daily 的头像
AI Daily3 年前

The iPhone will be relevant for a lot longer than 4!

Robert Scoble 的头像
Robert Scoble3 年前

@AlexAIDaily Probably!

Dennis Malmgren 的头像
Dennis Malmgren3 年前

Consumers aren't swapping to glasses in that time frame.

Robert Scoble 的头像
Robert Scoble3 年前

That is when they will be introduced. Adoption sometimes takes years.

korben 的头像
korben3 年前

Hasn’t Apple hired researches in BCI-related fields? It would make logical sense to go that direction.

Robert Scoble 的头像
Robert Scoble3 年前

Or buy neuralink from @elonmusk. :-)

相关视频

Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, on why the iPhone, the greatest consumer device ever made, is the wrong hardware for the AI era: Sam argues the iPhone's basic design wasn't made for a world where AI needs to live alongside your entire life. "I think the iPhone is currently the greatest piece of consumer hardware ever made by a lot. Like, incredible what that has done." The iPhone was designed for a pre-AI world. Sam Altman explains: "It was not meant for a world where you needed a piece of hardware that could absorb all of the context of your life. You know, you can use the phone, you can stop using the phone, you can put it in your pocket, but it's kind of like on or off." That binary, on or off, in use or in your pocket, is the core mismatch. A device that flips between active and dormant can't continuously absorb the context that a personal AGI would need to actually be useful to you. Sam uses the conversation he's having in that moment as the example: "This has been a very interesting conversation. I would love this to be referenced by my personal AGI later, but my phone is in my pocket and it's not going to understand." The vision he's pointing toward is a device that participates differently: "I would like a device that, if I wanted to, can participate and understand and know about this conversation." The shift Sam is describing is from a device you pick up and put down, to one that quietly captures the context of your life. Without that continuous context, a personal AGI can't actually be personal.

Big Brain AI

25,447 次观看 • 3 个月前

Here's more analysis on the Apple and Google deal to make a new kind of Siri, after I had a cup of coffee. This is what OpenAI is doing: they're making a variety of new products and going after Apple. Apple didn't want to give OpenAI any more data to help a potential new competitor. The real problem for this OpenAI effort is that we're about to move to glasses. People don't believe me that we're about to move to glasses, but you should, because I just got back from CES and there was a ton of glasses there. For OpenAI to really get somewhere, they need to add a camera to an earphone. While I don't see that in this latest report, I won't be shocked to see a camera show up somewhere eventually. It is cameras that add understanding of the real world, which can lead to many new features that Apple's current AirPods Pro can't match. I believe Apple is developing such a product to go with their glasses, which makes a lot of sense. Also, Google's AI models are better at multimodality; this means they can use cameras in a much better way than even OpenAI's models can. This is why in Silicon Valley robotics companies, a lot of them use Google Gemini: because robots need multimodality. Apple's glasses, which are expected in 2027, have some significant advantages over the others. First, they have eye sensors in them, so it knows where the user is looking. It also can tell what the user is touching, holding, or gesturing towards. This new capability will give Siri a significant parlor trick: it will let Siri answer questions that no other search engine has been able to answer before. But the real reason I'm still bullish on Apple's glasses isn't technology—it's content. Apple has NBA rights and Formula One (among others) and a really great studio system, which has produced one of the biggest hits of the last six months. Pluribus. Apple also, because of its privacy stance, has a significant lead in consumer trust. Because of its retail stores, it also has a significant lead in the ability to: 1. Show people glasses 2. Get them fit properly 3. Get people trained On Saturday, I went to the main Apple store in Cupertino and watched one of the classes that they teach every few hours in an Apple store. The store was packed with people watching the class on a huge screen in the middle of the store. Apple has dramatically changed retail because of its stores, which gives it the most trusted brand in the business and gives it distribution to most of the world's richest people. While OpenAI has almost a billion users, it is unclear whether those users will switch ecosystems from Apple to OpenAI. Even if OpenAI's AI and devices can do a few more things, I'm not so sure anybody's going to care when Apple has very capable headphones that match up with their iPhones and has the world's richest people addicted to the Apple ecosystem (me included). Here is one of the secret Chinese suites at CES, which makes a series of glasses to sell to other brands. This gives you a sense of how fast the glasses world is moving. AI needs to not just tell you what it's seeing, but it needs to show you things to really make the solution complete. Also, Apple usually picks a much better design than anyone else. Because it's such a luxury brand, it can charge more than anybody else and be more profitable. I don't see anyone else being able to put together the whole solution the way Apple can. Therefore, I am still very bullish on Apple making a dramatic announcement about glasses sometime in the next 24 months. At CES, though, it's clear that many manufacturers will try. XREAL 👓 just got $100 million of funding to continue its glasses development, and officials of the company told me it will release its Android XR based glasses later this year. Short version: AI is coming to wearables in a big way, and Apple will do what it always does: come in late to the market and redefine it when it enters. It still has all the pieces to put together the puzzle, even though it doesn't have its own LLM so had to do a deal with Google for that. Yeah, others will be earlier to the market, and will win some buyers because of that, but buyers like me know that and will be happy to put down our other ones to buy Apple because of its advantages. With one big caveat: Apple has to deliver an amazing pair of glasses, and maybe a headphone with a camera, to keep the competition from taking its lunch. Also, behind the scenes there is a big patent battle brewing. Apple has quite a few, but I talked with Ann Greenberg at CES, who started Gracenote. She says she has several patents that will enable a large company to force others to license their technology and that she's already in final stages of selling those patents to a big company. All the big companies have patent portfolios they can use against each other, and particularly smaller, newer, competitors. Microsoft alone has dozens of patents it bought to start off its Hololens efforts, which it gave up on, but Microsoft still has almost 1,000 lawyers who would love to go after other companies for licensing deals. Plus, Google-funded Magic Leap has about 1,000 patents, so it'll be interesting to see if anyone buys the remnants of that company. The question is: can anyone disrupt Apple? Especially OpenAI?

Robert Scoble

275,056 次观看 • 7 个月前

🚨 Most people haven't realized it, but without proper legal oversight, AI glasses might already be supporting privacy harm and CRIMINAL activity: Last year, Alexander Klöpping, a Dutch journalist, went to Amsterdam's financial district using AI glasses. After seconds-long interactions with random people on the street, the facial recognition technology powering his glasses could identify the person using publicly available data from the internet. His goal was to demonstrate how invasive facial recognition technology has become, especially since anyone can wear a device that enables real-time identification. Many people forget, but besides the more 'hyped' use cases, real-time identification can also be used to support criminal activity. For example, someone may use these types of AI glasses to identify the victim after a few seconds of small talk, then pretend to be an old acquaintance to steal or commit a violent crime. Most smart glasses have a small green light at the upper corner to signal that the camera is on, but my guess is that the majority of people will not notice it (that's what we see in the video, too). Also, more recently, I have seen smart glasses WITHOUT the green light (which would likely be illegal in some countries and U.S. states). The video is from November 2024, but has been circulating again one year later. I would say that from legal and regulatory perspectives, one year later, the problem remains the same, and little to nothing has been done to protect people from AI-led privacy invasion on the streets (which might also facilitate other types of harm and violent crime). I would also say that, in general, we are WORSE in December 2025 than we were in November 2024. Why? There is a global deregulatory trend in AI (pushed by the U.S.), and, through the Digital Omnibus, the EU is proposing changes to the GDPR and the EU AI Act that are detrimental to the protection of fundamental rights, including, of course, privacy. Despite all the odds... I'm cautiously optimistic that the pendulum will swing in the opposite direction in 2026, as deregulated AI clearly benefits no one (except tech billionaires). - 👉 Most people have no idea why privacy matters, ESPECIALLY when AI is everywhere. Make sure to share this video. 👉 To learn more about AI's legal and ethical challenges, join my newsletter's 87,500+ subscribers (link below).

Luiza Jarovsky, PhD

370,160 次观看 • 8 个月前

This info about META will BLOW YOUR MIND American “I worked in IT for like 13 years” “I learned a lot about data privacy — and social media and what apps are notoriously bad when it comes to data privacy. At the very top of the list, the worst offender, the worst app for data privacy is Facebook Messenger” “Let me just explain this to you. If you have Messenger on your phone and you don't have any other apps by Meta, you don't have Facebook, Instagram, threads, nothing. If the only thing from Meta you have on your phone is Messenger and you connect to a WiFi, Messenger makes a map of that Wi-Fi network. - It collects information about every single device that is connected to that network - So every phone, every computer, every tablet, every printer, every camera, every thermostat, every smart TV, every Roku device, and on every single one of those devices - They're collecting the name of the device, the IP address of the device, what type of device it is, whether or not your device has access to that device And this doesn't just happen on your home network, it happens on every Wi-Fi network you connect to. —- And it's a lot more information than just, oh, there's 200 devices connected to this network. No, it's detailed information about every single device. Like, here's a mobile device connected - it's an iPhone - It's titled Jeremy's iPhone - It's running iOS version blank blank - Its IP address is blank blank blank blank - Its MAC address or its hardware ID is blank blank blank But they also collect a crap ton of information from your actual phone. Like - The names, phone numbers, email addresses, and social links of literally everyone in your contacts. - Your location history - Your browsing history. - A detailed list of every single app that you've ever installed - YOUR PASSWORDS - YOUR FINGERPRINTS - YOUR FACE ID Spoiler alert, it's not. Downloading Messenger means that you consent to their terms of service. You give consent just by downloading the Messenger app. Using the service and downloading the app gives consent. Consent for your phone to be used as a data collection device. To collect data about every place you go and every person you're in contact with. — Messenger is easily the worst one”

Wall Street Apes

215,676 次观看 • 1 年前