I think it's good for Akida.
Akida is not there to do all the training on the huge ML datasets, but rather to infer from the incoming data if there is something not right, and to decide which of the trained NN's to send the data to.
BRN Discussion Ongoing
- Thread starter TechGirl
- Start date
Akida is not there to do all the training on the huge ML datasets, but rather to infer from the incoming data if there is something not right, and to decide which of the trained NN's to send the data to.
"According to the data, the voice recognition function using neuromorphic computing can wake up 5-10 times faster than the traditional voice control function."
I don't recall seeing this elsewhere, it says it wakes up 5 - 10 times faster than the traditional one.
Recently I checked new Merc CLA and the Hey Mercedes was already pretty fast, can someone check the latest EQE or EQS and compare how long it takes for it to react and check whether its actually quicker? I feel like it's actually quicker Lol
Latest EQE video and it has a Hey Mercedes example (I think):
Imho dyor
Last edited:
buena suerte :-)
BOB Bank of Brainchip
I agree that it would be great to get some kind of announcement re sales etc without having to divulge company names!
But my thoughts are that we ARE three++ years ahead of any other competitors chip so when/if they catch up with us they will also have to sell their PROVEN product to companies to adopt the technology to their products and no doubt will also have EAP's and NDA's attached so most probably 2+ more years behind!! by then it would only make sense that AKIDA WILL already be in Billions of products Globally and the market leader!! (As we are now
Also others are trying to emulate our Akida 1000 and are struggling to do so and while they are trying we are advancing with more superior Chips of which I believe are already in testing stages with companies (my thought only but very possible!) so that takes us even further away from other competition.
We are Into the last two weeks of this quarter and then 4C report out end of next month $$$$$$$$
GO BRN And fingers crossed
for some NEWS Soooooooon Happy Friday .... Green please...Green please <- true meaning: I know it's probably gonna be freaking red again but one can only hope...I agree that it would be great to get some kind of announcement re sales etc without having to divulge company names!
But my thoughts are that we ARE three++ years ahead of any other competitors chip so when/if they catch up with us they will also have to sell their PROVEN product to companies to adopt the technology to their products and no doubt will also have EAP's and NDA's attached so most probably 2+ more years behind!! by then it would only make sense that AKIDA WILL already be in Billions of products Globally and the market leader!! (As we are now
Also others are trying to emulate our Akida 1000 and are struggling to do so and while they are trying we are advancing with more superior Chips of which I believe are already in testing stages with companies (my thought only but very possible!) so that takes us even further away from other competition.
We are Into the last two weeks of this quarter and then 4C report out end of next month $$$$$$$$
GO BRN And fingers crossed
buena suerte :-)
BOB Bank of Brainchip
Think .... Green Green Green hopefully the only Red today will be my wine 
hopefully the only Red today will be my wine 
Dr E Brown
Regular
This has me really confused. We are aware that Akida works effectively and efficiently using only 4 bits, minimising power usage without affecting quality. Akida is agnostic to environment.
So why are these two behemoths promoting 8 bits for widespread use of neural networks? I just don’t understand. If somebody with more understanding than me can explain I would be grateful please.
Learning
Learning to the Top 🕵♂️
Now is a good opportunity @alwaysgreen.
I remember you saying, 'selling ice to Eskimo'
Maybe it's time to put that's skill to works and sell Akida IP to
, Samsung, Toyota and every other tech company. 
It's great to be a shareholder 🏖.
I remember you saying, 'selling ice to Eskimo'
Maybe it's time to put that's skill to works and sell Akida IP to
, Samsung, Toyota and every other tech company. It's great to be a shareholder 🏖.
Fact Finder
Top 20
My take on this is simple but based upon a great number of complex research papers I have found and read over the last five years.
These papers probably number in their hundreds and the primary issue they are seeking to address is how to reduce bit size without loss of accuracy.
The industry paradigm has been the more bits the better. 16 is better than 8, 32 is better than 16, 64 is better than 32.
Then along came Peter van der Made and Anil Mankar and out of the blue they say you don’t need 64, 32, 16, 8 bit we can do everything you need with 1 to 4 bit without any significant loss of accuracy or any loss of accuracy and in so doing save the electricity grid from melting down and the web grinding to a halt.
In many quarters I can imagine the cynicism with which these claims completely against the ruling paradigm were met and ignored.
There is that saying about the difficulty in pushing something liquid uphill. Selling the AKIDA Revolution was not easy.
However here we have the big three Nvidia, ARM & Intel throwing out the old paradigm that more bit is better and demanding an 8 bit revolution.
In one stroke of their pen the two crazy old guys from Brainchip are embraced and validated.
I have said it before Brainchip is at the Edge waiting for the World to catch on and slowly time and tide are turning in its favour.
Now this is of course my opinion only so DYOR
FF
AKIDA BALLISTA
Taproot
Regular
ORImportant find Dr. E.
The EU unboxes its plan for smart device security
Natasha Lomas@riptari / 10:22 PM GMT+10•September 15, 2022
Image Credits: Getty Images
European Union lawmakers have proposed a new set of product rules to apply to smart devices that’s intended to compel makers of Internet-connected hardware — such as ‘smart’ washing machines or connected toys — to pay fulsome attention to device security.
The proposed EU Cyber Resilience Act will introduce mandatory cybersecurity requirements for products that have “digital elements” sold across the bloc, with requirements applying throughout their lifecycle — meaning gadget makers will need to provide ongoing security support and updates to patch emerging vulnerabilities — the Commission said today.
The draft regulation also has a focus on smart device makers communicating to consumers “sufficient and accurate information” — to ensure buyers able to grasp security considerations at the point of purchase and set up devices securely after purchase.
Penalties proposed by the Commission for non-compliance for “essential” cybersecurity requirements scale up to the higher of €15M or 2.5% of worldwide annual turnover, with other regulation obligation breaches having a maximum sanction of €10M or 2% of turnover.
The EU’s executive said the proposed regulation will apply to all products that are connected “either directly or indirectly to another device or network” — with some exceptions for products for which cybersecurity requirements are already set out in existing EU rules, such as medical devices, aviation and cars.
Pan-EU rules for smart device security
In a summary of the proposed measures, which are based on an Legislative Framework for EU product legislation which was updated in 2008, the Commission said they will lay down:
“The new rules will rebalance responsibility towards manufacturers, who must ensure conformity with security requirements of products with digital elements that are made available on the EU market,” it wrote in a press release. “As a result, they will benefit consumers and citizens, as well as businesses using digital products, by enhancing the transparency of the security properties and promoting trust in products with digital elements, as well as by ensuring better protection of their fundamental rights, such as privacy and data protection.”
A Commission Q&A on the initiative further stipulates that manufacturers would undergo “a process of conformity assessment to demonstrate whether the specified requirements relating to a product have been fulfilled”. It notes that this might be done via self-assessment or by a third-party conformity assessment “depending on the criticality of the product in question”.
Where compliance with the applicable requirements has been demonstrated, device makers would be able to affix the EU’s CE mark — indicating conformity of digital elements with the product security regulation.
Non-compliance would be handled by market surveillance authorities appointed by Member States which would be responsible for enforcement — with proposed powers to not only order a stop to non-compliance but “eliminate the risk” by prohibiting a product from being sold or otherwise restricting its market availability. Competent authorities could also order infringing products to be withdrawn or recalled. While supplying incorrect, incomplete or misleading info to regulators and surveillance authorities would risk a fine of up to €5M or 1% of turnover.
Commenting in a statement, Margrethe Vestager, Commission EVP for digital strategy, added: “We deserve to feel safe with the products we buy in the single market. Just as we can trust a toy or a fridge with a CE marking, the Cyber Resilience Act will ensure the connected objects and software we buy comply with strong cybersecurity safeguards. It will put the responsibility where it belongs, with those that place the products on the market.”
Smart devices have been a hot bed of security horror stories for years. Although there have been earlier legislative moves to plug glaring security gaps — such as a 2018 California law banning makers from setting easily guessable default passwords in devices.
The UK has also been working on a ‘security by design’ law for connected gadgets for a number of years — airing a draft back in 2019(though this product security bill, which bundles telecoms infrastructure security provisions, is still making its way through the British parliament).
Despite not being first to the punch on smart device security, the EU is hoping its nascent approach will become an international point of reference, with the Commission’s press release suggesting: “EU standards based on the Cyber Resilience Act will facilitate its implementation and will be an asset for the EU cybersecurity industry in global markets.”
However there is still a fairly long road for the proposal to travel before it can become EU law, as the European Parliament and Council will need to examine the draft — and may seek to amend it.
The Commission has also proposed a two year time frame once the regulation is adopted for device makers and EU Member States to adapt to the full sweep of the new rules. So the regulation likely won’t be biting much before 2025.
That said, there is a shorter timeframe for the reporting obligation on manufacturers for “actively exploited vulnerabilities and incidents” — which would apply one year from the date of entry into force of the regulation, as the Commission expects that piece to be easier to implement.”
If I was a toy maker I would think the best approach in most cases would be smart toys that do not need connection.
My opinion only DYOR
FF
AKIDA BALLISTA
the toy maker, ( lets use Nintendo as an example ), could have the best of both worlds by incorporating a complete solution from the likes of :
Megachips + Morse Micro + Brainchip and have a product that is connected, smart and secure.
Maybe this solution could be applied to other areas such as fridges, washing machines, lighting, doorbells, security cameras, wearables, etc, etc, etc
Fact Finder
Top 20
Hi @Dr. E. Brown
I am passing on thanks from Brainchip to you this article is now in the hands of the VP of Sales Chris Stevens.
Regards
FF
AKIDA BALLISTA
Dr E Brown
Regular
More interesting things happening!
Dr E Brown
Regular
Wow, thank you FF
Quatrojos
Regular
Valeo at IAA Transportation 2022: order intake up 50% for passenger and goods mobility
Valeo will showcase its technologies dedicated to the transportation of goods and people. Together, these technologies have generated a 50% increase in orders for Valeo
www.valeo.com
Quatrojos
Regular
Valeo at IAA Transportation 2022: order intake up 50% for passenger and goods mobility
Valeo will showcase its technologies dedicated to the transportation of goods and people. Together, these technologies have generated a 50% increase in orders for Valeo
Fact Finder
Top 20
While I am an investor and sometimes trader in Brainchip Inc and maintain a positive overall view of the prospects for success I do not always agree with decisions made by the Brainchip Inc and when that is the case I invariably take my concerns to the company privately.
Fortunately this company unlike some I have invested in will engage in robust debate with me and on my preferred terms which is in writing. Often I am not persuaded by the company but to date though not persuaded they have convinced me that the basis of the decision they have made is their genuine attempt to comply with the law and look after the best interests of all shareholders.
On the issue of the non publication of the last granted patent I had the following discussion and as this issue is still gnawing at some I have sort permission to publish the following email discussion I had with Brainchip Inc on the subject:
Fact Finder: I am very unhappy with this news regarding the patent...
Brainchip: I understand your frustration. There are good reasons for the non-announcements. It has nothing to do with any attempt to distance ourselves from the retail shareholders at all. Let me begin by saying that the decision to announce or not to announce falls into a very grey area of the guidance which I can share with you. Even after reading my justification below, you may not agree but hopefully you can see this from our perspective.
In this case, applying the Continuous Disclosure standards by asking, would this information make an informed investor buy or sell the stock, we believe the answer is that it is unlikely that it would. This decision was not taken lightly by any means. We had lengthy conversations with our two patent attorneys based in Perth at the research institute who advised us on this position. One of the very key differentiators of this patent from the others in the past and the ones that are pending and will be granted in the next few weeks is that this is a patent on an application of Akida and not on the very critical and core technology that makes Akida what it is. Protecting one possible use of Akida is not nearly as critical as protecting the “secret sauce”. And while this is one potential way of encrypting data, according to our best and brightest, “encryption is a dime a dozen” and there are many other ways to do it. For someone to infringe upon this patent, first they have to invent their own neuromorphic chip and then do voice encryption using two chips and an SNN.
As you know, the applications of Akida are endless and if we take the position that we are going to do an announcement for each and every one of them, it would be dilutive to the more valuable and critical announcements and we will have reverted back to being the very “noisy” BRN that drew some very unwanted attention and criticism from the ASX over the past few years. We are on their closely watched list and everything we do is scrutinized to death to ensure we are not pumping the stock so we err on the side of caution.
Fact Finder: It seemed to myself and others that this patent allowed for the use of the Hey Mercedes to securely interact with home and office as proposed by Mercedes Benz. If this is only in part correct then it is clearly significant.
Brainchip: A Patent on an application of Akida which in of itself is not a unique application (encryption) although it may be unique to do so on a neuromorphic chip. This does not protect our core Akida technology and although we felt the research was valuable and worth patenting, we do not foresee any immediate commercial applications or demand for this.
Fact Finder: Secondly having regard to the five criteria for the grant of any patent, as well as the time and cost involved unless the company does not concern itself with the proper allocation of scarce resources all patents by their very nature are important. Thirdly for the company, to as Tony Dawe suggested to another shareholder, decide this patent can be consigned to a footnote in the October 4C is to raise concerns about the true motives of management.
Brainchip: The next few patents that are issued will definitely be announced. When you see them, the difference will be very clear.
I have previously mentioned that in my communications and discussions at the AGM I formed the view that Brainchip Inc is very, very, very concerned about having any adverse entries made against them by the ASX. While Brainchip Inc has never stated why unlike every other company I have invested in they have such deep rooted concerns I am of the opinion that as it is the end goal to list on the Nasdaq that this is the reason. The Nasdaq looks at the character of the company and its history on other exchanges in determining how and when any new company will be permitted to list. Brainchip Inc wants an unblemished good name and in my opinion goes overboard to comply beyond strictly with the ASX Rules.
My opinion only DYOR
FF
AKIDA BALLISTA
Fortunately this company unlike some I have invested in will engage in robust debate with me and on my preferred terms which is in writing. Often I am not persuaded by the company but to date though not persuaded they have convinced me that the basis of the decision they have made is their genuine attempt to comply with the law and look after the best interests of all shareholders.
On the issue of the non publication of the last granted patent I had the following discussion and as this issue is still gnawing at some I have sort permission to publish the following email discussion I had with Brainchip Inc on the subject:
Fact Finder: I am very unhappy with this news regarding the patent...
Brainchip: I understand your frustration. There are good reasons for the non-announcements. It has nothing to do with any attempt to distance ourselves from the retail shareholders at all. Let me begin by saying that the decision to announce or not to announce falls into a very grey area of the guidance which I can share with you. Even after reading my justification below, you may not agree but hopefully you can see this from our perspective.
In this case, applying the Continuous Disclosure standards by asking, would this information make an informed investor buy or sell the stock, we believe the answer is that it is unlikely that it would. This decision was not taken lightly by any means. We had lengthy conversations with our two patent attorneys based in Perth at the research institute who advised us on this position. One of the very key differentiators of this patent from the others in the past and the ones that are pending and will be granted in the next few weeks is that this is a patent on an application of Akida and not on the very critical and core technology that makes Akida what it is. Protecting one possible use of Akida is not nearly as critical as protecting the “secret sauce”. And while this is one potential way of encrypting data, according to our best and brightest, “encryption is a dime a dozen” and there are many other ways to do it. For someone to infringe upon this patent, first they have to invent their own neuromorphic chip and then do voice encryption using two chips and an SNN.
As you know, the applications of Akida are endless and if we take the position that we are going to do an announcement for each and every one of them, it would be dilutive to the more valuable and critical announcements and we will have reverted back to being the very “noisy” BRN that drew some very unwanted attention and criticism from the ASX over the past few years. We are on their closely watched list and everything we do is scrutinized to death to ensure we are not pumping the stock so we err on the side of caution.
Fact Finder: It seemed to myself and others that this patent allowed for the use of the Hey Mercedes to securely interact with home and office as proposed by Mercedes Benz. If this is only in part correct then it is clearly significant.
Brainchip: A Patent on an application of Akida which in of itself is not a unique application (encryption) although it may be unique to do so on a neuromorphic chip. This does not protect our core Akida technology and although we felt the research was valuable and worth patenting, we do not foresee any immediate commercial applications or demand for this.
Fact Finder: Secondly having regard to the five criteria for the grant of any patent, as well as the time and cost involved unless the company does not concern itself with the proper allocation of scarce resources all patents by their very nature are important. Thirdly for the company, to as Tony Dawe suggested to another shareholder, decide this patent can be consigned to a footnote in the October 4C is to raise concerns about the true motives of management.
Brainchip: The next few patents that are issued will definitely be announced. When you see them, the difference will be very clear.
I have previously mentioned that in my communications and discussions at the AGM I formed the view that Brainchip Inc is very, very, very concerned about having any adverse entries made against them by the ASX. While Brainchip Inc has never stated why unlike every other company I have invested in they have such deep rooted concerns I am of the opinion that as it is the end goal to list on the Nasdaq that this is the reason. The Nasdaq looks at the character of the company and its history on other exchanges in determining how and when any new company will be permitted to list. Brainchip Inc wants an unblemished good name and in my opinion goes overboard to comply beyond strictly with the ASX Rules.
My opinion only DYOR
FF
AKIDA BALLISTA
Really appreciate you sharing this FF. It’s good to know that BrainChip are putting a lot of thought into their decisions of whether or not to announce something. How long ago was this conversation between you and BrainChip because what stood out to me was: ‘ones that are pending and will be granted in the next few weeks’.
Shadow59
Regular
"One of the very key differentiators of this patent from the others in the past and the ones that are pending and will be granted in the next few weeks is that this is a patent on an application of Akida and not on the very critical and core technology that makes Akida what it is."
Hi FF thanks for sharing all this. How long ago was there reply? So potentially there could be significant announcements shortly!
Xhosa12345
Regular
Blazar85
Regular
It's a quiet day for me so I thought I'd try my hand at some digging on this. Came across this article
https://cnevpost.com/2022/01/07/mic...ith-xpeng-on-latters-virtual-voice-assistant/
that mentions the use of an "ultra-large scale online neural network engine as well as a small offline splicing engine" that's linked with Microsoft Azure. Not suggesting at all that Akida is involved but the small offline splicing engine is intriguing.
Similar threads
