Boab
I wish I could paint like Vincent
Dodgy knee's if you choose to accept your mission this message will self destruct in 5 seconds.
BRN Discussion Ongoing
- Thread starter TechGirl
- Start date
I always thought the NASA SBIR was a bit bogus, calling for the removal of the Cortex processor from Akida 1 on the basis of SWaP.
The size would be less than a quarter of a fingernail, weight likewise.
For power there would be negligible difference.
The only real difference would be in the Cortex licence fee.
Foundries are sitting ducks globally for a missile attack, setting all countries back, security you would think would have been tightened
by more than a couple of notches in recent times.
Lets all hope that evil and destruction remains in a black hole for the unforeseeable future.
Below is a good link on the subject of Hostile Takeovers, which some may enjoy reading....regards Tech
A takeover bid can be characterised as either 'hostile' or 'friendly', depending on whether the Bidder has the recommendation of the Target Board that target shareholders should accept the bid. - Insight | MinterEllison
A takeover bid can be characterised as either 'hostile' or 'friendly', depending on whether the Bidder has the recommendation of the Target Board that target shareholders should accept the bid.
buena suerte :-)
BOB Bank of Brainchip
Great read ... Cheers C TECHFoundries are sitting ducks globally for a missile attack, setting all countries back, security you would think would have been tightened
by more than a couple of notches in recent times.
Lets all hope that evil and destruction remains in a black hole for the unforeseeable future.
Below is a good link on the subject of Hostile Takeovers, which some may enjoy reading....regards Tech
A takeover bid can be characterised as either 'hostile' or 'friendly', depending on whether the Bidder has the recommendation of the Target Board that target shareholders should accept the bid. - Insight | MinterEllison
A takeover bid can be characterised as either 'hostile' or 'friendly', depending on whether the Bidder has the recommendation of the Target Board that target shareholders should accept the bid.www.minterellison.com
McHale
Regular
So, Jesse @chapman89 I agree with virtually everything you have put in your balanced post above, I also alluded to the well compiled post put up by @AusEire as an example of what has been achieved by BRN in recent times.I didn’t think Brainchip/Sean ever said by the end of 2022 they will break even. Was this the strawman interview? I’ll have to give it a listen again.
I may be wrong but I believe he said once they had around 100 employees that’s when they would break even.
Is the company aggressively hiring though?
If I am going to criticise the company on anything it’s failing to leave out critical achievements in the quarterly/s as they could do much better to having in point form all the achievements that was made.
They didn’t even announce akd1500 with one of the worlds biggest foundries in Global Foundries.
But, where does everybody think the revenue was going to come from when Renesas won’t have any MCU’s containing akida commercially until sometime towards the end of the year? So be prepared for a couple more quarterly’s with barely any revenue.
It’s pretty clear that whilst the company still offers akd1000 as part of their portfolio, most are waiting on akd 2.0. You can just see that from the comments from Prophesee SiFive Intel realityAi and others when they commented on the release of it, check the Brainchip website if nobody has read it.
There’s something big IMO happening with megachips, Douglas Fairbairn from megachips said they helped with the back end design of the AKD1500, if you go on to the megachips website under the ASIC section it’s been saying it’s “under construction” for quite some time, also on Douglas Fairbairn LinkedIn it says he is helping the leadership team in Japan to help the company add AI/ML expertise and technology to their already extensive ASIC design capability. It’s happening people, we just have to be patient.
We are invested in a disruptive technology that even those working with AI need months of training to even understand neuromorphic, so it takes time.
Now should we be annoyed at the company? A little, but there still has been a significant amount achieved in the last 12 months. Just look at what was achieved in the last 3 months that @AusEire posted written by FF. They failed to mention it all, so I will be personally attending the AGM and bringing this to their attention because it’s a fail in my opinion.
But anybody who fails to see the achievements over the last 12 months from ecosystem building, presentations, marketing increase, significant employment of star studded employees, isn’t looking past a share price.
Yes it sucks, yes it hurts to see the constant negative press, but that makes the rise back up even sweeter to those who cast doubt on Brainchip.
Am I going to listen to so called financial experts in the Motley fool? Or am I going to listen to industry experts who are praising Brainchip? I think I know who I will choose to listen to.
I seen a couple people claim to have held for years but sold after the recent 4C? Now that to me is just nonsense, unless you needed the money for financial reasons, why would you sell right before Renesas brings out MCU’s containing akd1000? This is what we’ve been waiting for for a damn long time, the worlds first commercial products using Brainchips technology. The spotlight that will be on Brainchip once that happens will be a monumental step, that is a true re rate in the share price.
Anyway the AGM will be good, we need to let the company know that they need to learn to communicate with shareholders much better through the means of the asx, it’s not about pumping up the share price, it’s about giving Brainchip the exposure it deserves and potential shareholders can see what’s happening through the asx. Now yes whilst most people have social media, we shouldn’t have to search on social media to get all our information. I know if I was going to decide if I wanted to invest in a company, I’d want to read the 4c reports and announcements and not have to wander through different social media platforms.
You have, in fact, mirrored in certain respects my concern about the way BRN are communicating to SHers and the market at large with regard to progress that they are making and how they disperse that information, as a "genuine" long term holder this is a real concern to me, which has compounded as time passes by.
I am not at all a serial poster who goes on about making the same criticisms in numerous repetitive daily outbursts, and I certainly do not want to be emotive about this subject, because I know that being emotive will serve no good purpose and only muddy the waters, but I definitely want to see change for the better, so my effort is to express my thinking in a non emotive and straightforward way
So I would like to see BRN create/commence a conversation with the ASX with regard to what they can announce (and how they should fashion announcements) on the ASX platform, because as you say Jesse they didn't even announce akida 1500 and the relationship with Global Foundries ??? but IMO there is a lot more that would fit the definition and that would amount to "material" information, definitely worthy of being ann'ed on the ASX platform - where most market participants look for their information.
A suggestion, perhaps BRN or Tony Dawe could take what they might be consider to be material news to ASX and have it vetted by them to see if it was worthy of the ASX imprimatur; and if it wasn't worthy - then why was it seen by ASX to be not so. BRN have not told us (that I am aware of) why or what was the problem they had with the ASX regarding an announcement they put forward was deemed to be "immaterial" and even possibly subject to ASX sanction. As a holder I would like to see more info about that problem, but more importantly for me I would like to see BRN get more pro-active about having material news released on the ASX, because IMO (and Chappies too) there is material news which BRN has had which has not been put to the market at large via the ASX platform.
I have also written to Tony Dawe with regard to the 4C's, I received a pro forma letter back (the type of which has also been referred to by other posters), Tony's response did not really address what I had spoken to, so I wrote back referring specifically to making the 4C more content rich rather than repeat copy and paste formats, I even made specific suggestions on how they might do that. Tony wrote back and said he would forward my suggestions to management. The most recent 4C showed no change, so I didn't necessarily think they would change things on the back of my suggestions, but maybe if more SHers write to Tony they might do something.
I honestly feel that BRN is doing itself a disservice on this matter, and by default that means the same thing for shareholders, I know that I am not the only person who feels this way. This is not simply about the paucity of money coming in recently, I wasn't really expecting much on that front, but the number reported wasn't impressive, probably more unfortunate, in the sense that it has disappointed a good few holders. I have never come here or HC and spoke to the notion of $5 or $10 or whatever, I mean no disrespect to those who have, my approach is to keep my emotions and attachments more grounded in the present reality, which translates to also not getting too attached to certain outcomes. Right at the moment $1 is a long way from here, and we don't live in 2019 any longer.
On the subject of Sean speaking about breakeven (which I take to be income/revenue equivalence to outgoings), I have just looked at the AGM from 2022 and cannot find it there, however it may have come up in the Q & A session which is not included in the AGM notes. There is also a possibility that it came up on a podcast, regardless Jesse, I have clear recall of this statement being widely discussed here and over at HC on many occasions.
So maybe I am one of the 100 Monkeys (of the 100 Monkey Theory), because the statement Sean made about reaching a point of around 100 staff and having income comparable to outlays by end of 2022, has been mentioned by numerous other (more regular) posters here recently. I am somewhat bemused that you have responded to my post regarding above, however am perfectly comfortable speaking back to you on the matter, I still remain a fan of yourself and the great posting you have put up here and HC over a long period.
Cheers
mc
I recall Sean’s reply was vague, not too clear, and I was surprised that it was taken and amplified into something definite by this community.
Without a clear audio transcript, it is difficult to judge!
BaconLover
Founding Member
Sean's comment start around 41 min mark.
He initially said he cannot disclose the timeline on the breakdown, but later on finished off the answer to the asked question by linking the "100 employee" comment.
Edit: it says video can't be played, but if you click the link I should take you to vimeo website where you can play it.
chapman89
Founding Member
Hi @McHale, great post and well said.
I think we are all frustrated with the share price and you’re right, it’s compounded by the lack of effort put in by management to maximise shareholder value where they can. Or so it seems.
The only reference I can find to Sean stating that the company would break even was in the strawman interview. If you listen from about 41 minutes he is asked about the cash runway and he went on to say
“remember I talked about building up to 100 people or so this year, we think at that point we are at a pretty good size scale and the revenue growth will start to outgrow the expense growth pretty rapidly, that’s the model we are going to leverage”
If anybody can find another quote from Sean, but I feel as though that’s the quote that’s been highlighted multiple times here.
Edit: looks like video wont work so if people type in strawman Brainchip interview they should be able to find it.
chapman89
Founding Member
What Sean was saying was:
1. He and the Board have a model for when they will achieve break even but they are not releasing that model and hence are not releasing the date;
2. They have planned growth in expenses through to end of 2022 where they hope to land on about 100 employees at which point they anticipate they will be right sized;
3. At the point when they are right sized the rate of growth in expenses will reduce substantially and become stabilised allowing for normal inflationary pressures;
4. At the time of this interview the rate of growth in expenses was outstripping the rate of growth in income;
5. At about the point in time that the rate of growth in expenses tapers off then the rate of growth in income will start to catch up and begin to accelerate and become a rate of growth faster than the rate of growth in expenses;
6. Once this disparity in growth rates of expenses and income reverses then eventually total income receipts will/must as a matter of mathematical certainty become equal with expenses and break even will be achieved;
7. At which point we go back to point 1. Which is the CEO and Board have agreed not to release their modelling on when this will occur.
So Sean Hehir did not and never has said that Brainchip will reach breakeven by end of 2022 or even by the time they reach about 100 employees and are right sized.
Fullmoonfever
Top 20
Just reading an interesting article on MCUs.
Highlighted what I deemed some pertinent comments / requirements / observations as indicated by some industry players where we can definitely assist.
Although the microcontroller market is set for sustained growth, do MCU technical features and functions need to evolve to continue meeting customer requirements? Is the general-purpose MCU being replaced by application-specific versions?
The humble microcontroller, now more than 50 years old, represents a sizable chunk of the overall electronic-component industry. MCUs continue to dominate the embedded scene, and with good reason: They are flexible, configurable, and easy to program. With microcontrollers used in everything from laser printers to washing machines and heating thermostats to forklift trucks, MCU shipment data provides a reasonable indication of the state of the electronics industry.
Over the years, application-specific versions have developed to meet the requirements of use cases such as motor control, wireless connectivity and ultra-low power. Some MCUs feature highly configurable analog and digital blocks, borrowing architectural concepts more associated with FPGAs than MCUs. Others are marketed as general-purpose controllers, incorporating an array of fixed-function blocks—from A/D and D/A converters to serial connectivity, timers/counters, GPIO, and cryptographic accelerators—to suit a broad range of applications.
Joe Thomsen, Microchip Technology
Although the microcontroller market is set for sustained growth, do MCU technical features and functions need to evolve to continue meeting customer requirements? Is the general-purpose MCU being replaced by application-specific versions?
According to Joe Thomsen, vice president of Microchip Technology’s 16-bit MCU Business Unit, the customers define the needs. “One of the things we do regularly is to evaluate what our customers are putting on their boards and what else is being implemented alongside the microcontroller,” said Thomsen. “Then we can determine how we can interface to those items more easily, more effectively, or [whether] we can actually integrate those features into the MCU itself.”
One focus is power. “Microcontrollers account for approximately 5% to 10% of the overall power consumption inside the vehicle, so we’re looking for further possibilities to reduce it,” said Ralf Koedel, vice president for microcontrollers at Infineon’s automotive division.
“Low power is one of the key items we need to look into to drive the MCU space further,” said Tim Burgess, senior director of the MCU Business Unit at Renesas. “The [MCU’s] low power is one of the major differentiators from microprocessors. As we decrease the process technology, it allows us to address low power by design. There’s always a conundrum with process technologies: When you go to a more advanced process node, you get better active consumption, but because the gate is very small, the leakage is significantly higher.”
Steven Tateosian, Infineon
Steven Tateosian, vice president, IoT, Compute and Wireless Business Unit of Infineon, approached the question from an industrial and consumer perspective, pointing to innovation’s role in raising MCU performance for a broader range of applications. “What we started seeing in the last five years is more integration, such as multicore processors, mixed with DSPs and other accelerators,” he said. These additions are being made “without fundamentally changing things around [MCUs’] ease of use and power profiles, and the overall system cost advantages that the MCU brings over microprocessors.”
The versatility of low-power microcontrollers has made them extremely popular for intelligent edge node applications, particularly those based on tinyML. Many voice-assistant–based applications rely on continuous cloud connectivity to conduct interference, only recognizing a trigger word or short phrase locally. However, this approach introduces latency and the risk of a device exploit. The need for local, deterministic decision-making is a priority.
Most microcontroller vendors focus on incorporating neural network accelerators into their MCUs, Koedel said, citing Infineon MCUs that integrate accelerators for automotive functions including graphical displays and ADAS radar processing.
Microchip’s Thomsen called AI a game-changer for MCUs involved in real-time closed-loop control. “I think AI is probably the big revolutionary change for the MCU, and in a lot of cases, it’s going to be a revolutionary change for our customers’ applications,” he said.
Bernd Westhoff, Renesas
For some MPU-based applications, there may well be a strong desire to migrate to an MCU, said Infineon’s Tateosian. “Some high-end smart thermostats with displays full of connectivity are MPU based, and some of them are high-end MCU based. The user won’t know the difference, but I can tell you the unit costs of those [two device types] are very different,” he said. “That’s a good example where some developers are willing to make the jump from an MPU to an MCU to save power and cost, and others see the software development effort as prohibitive.”
Bernd Westhoff, director of IoT product marketing at Renesas, noted that there has always been a degree of overlap between MCU and MPU performance. “MPUs in the past were already at 200 and 400 MHz, and MCUs are easily catching up with that,” he said.
Westhoff also cited some fundamental differences between MCU and MPU developments. “MPU people expect to have Linux, not an RTOS, so you may have a heavy issue in the future to convince a Linux MPU person to become an RTOS MCU person and develop their software there.”
Tim Burgess, Renesas
As MCUs benefit from more functionality, some inevitably become optimized for specific applications. Application-specific MCUs tend to focus on high-volume use cases, such as motor control. Could this trend continue so that the need for general-purpose microcontrollers declines?
“There are always going to be high-volume, low-cost solutions that ASICs [application-specific ICs] are going to take over,” said Microchip’s Thomsen. With shortening product development timescales, he added, the ability to select an MCU off the shelf today and start programming, even if it might be a bit more expensive, will meet a customer’s time-to-market requirements.
Renesas’ Burgess confirmed the continued need for general-purpose MCUs, observing, “It’s just not possible to tune or optimize application-specific processors for every single use case. There are thousands of different applications with so many different requirements, memories, packages, RAM, peripheral mixes, and when you get down to what you’d have to design for, there’s just not enough market to really justify it.”
Ralf Koedel, Infineon
The microcontroller market continues to experience year-on-year growth thanks to technical innovations and an endless list of use cases. In the automotive market, for example, Infineon’s Koedel told EE Times Europe he doesn’t see an end to growth yet. “If you look into motorcycles, for example, the trend now in India is to go from combustion engines to electrification, with a lot more electronic content, enabling a lot more [MCU growth],” he said.
Of all the MCU use cases highlighted by the executives we contacted, it’s clear that machine learning-based applications will become more significant this decade. With its low-power attributes, an architecture optimized with neural network acceleration, and encryption functionality, the MCU is a suitable choice for this use case.
Robert Huntley
Robert Huntley is a contributor for EE Times Europe.
Tags: Artificial Intelligence (AI), Embedded, ICs/Chips, MCU, Semiconductors
Highlighted what I deemed some pertinent comments / requirements / observations as indicated by some industry players where we can definitely assist.
What’s Next for the Microcontroller?
February 22, 2023 Robert HuntleyAlthough the microcontroller market is set for sustained growth, do MCU technical features and functions need to evolve to continue meeting customer requirements? Is the general-purpose MCU being replaced by application-specific versions?
The humble microcontroller, now more than 50 years old, represents a sizable chunk of the overall electronic-component industry. MCUs continue to dominate the embedded scene, and with good reason: They are flexible, configurable, and easy to program. With microcontrollers used in everything from laser printers to washing machines and heating thermostats to forklift trucks, MCU shipment data provides a reasonable indication of the state of the electronics industry.
Over the years, application-specific versions have developed to meet the requirements of use cases such as motor control, wireless connectivity and ultra-low power. Some MCUs feature highly configurable analog and digital blocks, borrowing architectural concepts more associated with FPGAs than MCUs. Others are marketed as general-purpose controllers, incorporating an array of fixed-function blocks—from A/D and D/A converters to serial connectivity, timers/counters, GPIO, and cryptographic accelerators—to suit a broad range of applications.
The microcontroller market exhibits continued growth
According to recent research by P&S Intelligence, the global microcontroller market accounted for US$18.80 billion in 2021 and is expected to reach US$43.61 billion in value by 2030, for a 9.8 % CAGR. The reasons for the projected growth are many, from the increasing use of machine learning in smart sensors to the dramatic increase in industrial automation systems.
Although the microcontroller market is set for sustained growth, do MCU technical features and functions need to evolve to continue meeting customer requirements? Is the general-purpose MCU being replaced by application-specific versions?
According to Joe Thomsen, vice president of Microchip Technology’s 16-bit MCU Business Unit, the customers define the needs. “One of the things we do regularly is to evaluate what our customers are putting on their boards and what else is being implemented alongside the microcontroller,” said Thomsen. “Then we can determine how we can interface to those items more easily, more effectively, or [whether] we can actually integrate those features into the MCU itself.”
What technical innovations are happening?
Today’s MCUs are typically highly integrated devices with lots of functionality, intended to offer a single-chip solution for many designs. As customer needs and application use cases evolve, how is the MCU keeping up?One focus is power. “Microcontrollers account for approximately 5% to 10% of the overall power consumption inside the vehicle, so we’re looking for further possibilities to reduce it,” said Ralf Koedel, vice president for microcontrollers at Infineon’s automotive division.
“Low power is one of the key items we need to look into to drive the MCU space further,” said Tim Burgess, senior director of the MCU Business Unit at Renesas. “The [MCU’s] low power is one of the major differentiators from microprocessors. As we decrease the process technology, it allows us to address low power by design. There’s always a conundrum with process technologies: When you go to a more advanced process node, you get better active consumption, but because the gate is very small, the leakage is significantly higher.”
Steven Tateosian, vice president, IoT, Compute and Wireless Business Unit of Infineon, approached the question from an industrial and consumer perspective, pointing to innovation’s role in raising MCU performance for a broader range of applications. “What we started seeing in the last five years is more integration, such as multicore processors, mixed with DSPs and other accelerators,” he said. These additions are being made “without fundamentally changing things around [MCUs’] ease of use and power profiles, and the overall system cost advantages that the MCU brings over microprocessors.”
The versatility of low-power microcontrollers has made them extremely popular for intelligent edge node applications, particularly those based on tinyML. Many voice-assistant–based applications rely on continuous cloud connectivity to conduct interference, only recognizing a trigger word or short phrase locally. However, this approach introduces latency and the risk of a device exploit. The need for local, deterministic decision-making is a priority.
Most microcontroller vendors focus on incorporating neural network accelerators into their MCUs, Koedel said, citing Infineon MCUs that integrate accelerators for automotive functions including graphical displays and ADAS radar processing.
Microchip’s Thomsen called AI a game-changer for MCUs involved in real-time closed-loop control. “I think AI is probably the big revolutionary change for the MCU, and in a lot of cases, it’s going to be a revolutionary change for our customers’ applications,” he said.
Will MCUs reach a limit where MPUs become more attractive?
With the MCU experiencing so much innovation and the number of use cases expanding, one wonders at what point the MCU will reach its limit and MPUs will become a more viable choice. The considerations for or against such a shift extend beyond technical specifications alone. Embedded engineering teams invest substantial time and money when selecting an MCU family for their designs, so they will want to stay with that architecture for as long as possible. Also, MCUs typically consume less power and are lower in cost than MPUs. MPUs are typically selected based on a software decision, the choice of interfaces, or purely for performance reasons, whereas MCU selection is more often related to hardware factors.
For some MPU-based applications, there may well be a strong desire to migrate to an MCU, said Infineon’s Tateosian. “Some high-end smart thermostats with displays full of connectivity are MPU based, and some of them are high-end MCU based. The user won’t know the difference, but I can tell you the unit costs of those [two device types] are very different,” he said. “That’s a good example where some developers are willing to make the jump from an MPU to an MCU to save power and cost, and others see the software development effort as prohibitive.”
Bernd Westhoff, director of IoT product marketing at Renesas, noted that there has always been a degree of overlap between MCU and MPU performance. “MPUs in the past were already at 200 and 400 MHz, and MCUs are easily catching up with that,” he said.
Westhoff also cited some fundamental differences between MCU and MPU developments. “MPU people expect to have Linux, not an RTOS, so you may have a heavy issue in the future to convince a Linux MPU person to become an RTOS MCU person and develop their software there.”
The general-purpose MCU is here to stay
As MCUs benefit from more functionality, some inevitably become optimized for specific applications. Application-specific MCUs tend to focus on high-volume use cases, such as motor control. Could this trend continue so that the need for general-purpose microcontrollers declines?
“There are always going to be high-volume, low-cost solutions that ASICs [application-specific ICs] are going to take over,” said Microchip’s Thomsen. With shortening product development timescales, he added, the ability to select an MCU off the shelf today and start programming, even if it might be a bit more expensive, will meet a customer’s time-to-market requirements.
Renesas’ Burgess confirmed the continued need for general-purpose MCUs, observing, “It’s just not possible to tune or optimize application-specific processors for every single use case. There are thousands of different applications with so many different requirements, memories, packages, RAM, peripheral mixes, and when you get down to what you’d have to design for, there’s just not enough market to really justify it.”
Fifty years plus and still going strong
The microcontroller market continues to experience year-on-year growth thanks to technical innovations and an endless list of use cases. In the automotive market, for example, Infineon’s Koedel told EE Times Europe he doesn’t see an end to growth yet. “If you look into motorcycles, for example, the trend now in India is to go from combustion engines to electrification, with a lot more electronic content, enabling a lot more [MCU growth],” he said.
Of all the MCU use cases highlighted by the executives we contacted, it’s clear that machine learning-based applications will become more significant this decade. With its low-power attributes, an architecture optimized with neural network acceleration, and encryption functionality, the MCU is a suitable choice for this use case.
Robert Huntley
Robert Huntley is a contributor for EE Times Europe.
Tags: Artificial Intelligence (AI), Embedded, ICs/Chips, MCU, Semiconductors
Humble Genius
Regular
Fullmoonfever
Top 20
Just some recent stats out of Standford.
Full report
HERE
Ann-Sophie Blank
Managing Consultant @ IBM iX｜Climate Reality Leader
2w
Standford University has released its latest AI Index Report for 2023. There’s a couple of key takeaways:
Industry races ahead of academia with the number of machine learning models released (32 vs 3 in 2022) 
The demand for AI professional skills is increasing in every single sector. 2% of job postings are now AI related 
The number of incidents of misuses of AI is increasing (think Midjourney’s more than real looking AI generated images of the pope rocking a white bomber jacket) 
Companies that have adopted AI continue to pull ahead with cost savings & revenue increases being the main drivers 
AI is both helping & harming the environment. While AI can be used to optimise energy usage, just BLOOM’s training run emitted 25 more carbon than a one-way trip from NYC to San Fransisco 
Policymakers are getting more and more interested in AI (although this is still lacking behind significantly) 
Citizen’s continue to distrust AI. Only 35% of Americans think positively about AI compared to 78% of Chinese What does this mean? 
AI is here to stay and its development will largely driven by the private sector to increase savings and reduce cost. Politicians are still very much playing catch up when it comes to regulating AI. It’s time to upskill - both for individuals and businesses. User experience for AI is going to become even bigger. How can AI be humanised, seamlessly integrated into business processes and people’s trust in it be increased?
Full report
HERE
Ann-Sophie Blank
Managing Consultant @ IBM iX｜Climate Reality Leader
2w
Standford University has released its latest AI Index Report for 2023. There’s a couple of key takeaways:
Industry races ahead of academia with the number of machine learning models released (32 vs 3 in 2022) The demand for AI professional skills is increasing in every single sector. 2% of job postings are now AI related The number of incidents of misuses of AI is increasing (think Midjourney’s more than real looking AI generated images of the pope rocking a white bomber jacket) Companies that have adopted AI continue to pull ahead with cost savings & revenue increases being the main drivers AI is both helping & harming the environment. While AI can be used to optimise energy usage, just BLOOM’s training run emitted 25 more carbon than a one-way trip from NYC to San Fransisco Policymakers are getting more and more interested in AI (although this is still lacking behind significantly) Citizen’s continue to distrust AI. Only 35% of Americans think positively about AI compared to 78% of Chinese What does this mean? AI is here to stay and its development will largely driven by the private sector to increase savings and reduce cost. Politicians are still very much playing catch up when it comes to regulating AI. It’s time to upskill - both for individuals and businesses. User experience for AI is going to become even bigger. How can AI be humanised, seamlessly integrated into business processes and people’s trust in it be increased?
supersonic001
Regular
100% my thinking when i read same, post my post !!Hmm, Looks like someone at BRN has being reading here and summarised @AusEire 's post
BRN Discussion Ongoing
Well actually, Synsense have two neuromorphic chips; "Speck" is a vision processor and "Xylo" is an audio processor. Unless I'm wrong, previous articles have only ever referred to BMW using Speck for vision processing functions. I believe the "Xylo" chip is NOT mentioned anywhere in relation...thestockexchange.com.au
Next company update should be resolution 9 at the AGM "Issue of 8,000,000 Restricted Stock Units to AusEire & Buddy's at TSEx"
McHale
Regular
Thanks @BaconLover & Jesse @chapman89, I'll take that as my dose of confirmation bias for this day, as you say the strawman interview shows clearly what Sean said, and that link you have both provided worked for me straight away; but @Rskiff has also replied to my post saying that he recalls Sean speaking to this matter in the Q&A session after last years AGM, my memory tells me that was where the breakeven and 100 staff notion by end 2022 was first put forward. So while I'm at it also my thanks to @Rskiff too.
Want to say something while I'm having this burst of posting, I do not think that posts here, or on HC, have any material effect whatsoever on the SP, the overwhelmingly important things that will act as a catalyst for SP movement are contracts and income/revenue, not some anonymous post on TSE. The TSE is a great source of research and a good BRN community, after nearly 8 years of holding and accumulating BRN I would not engage in any behaviour that I thought would sabotage the value of my investment, this is taking a long time - I don't want to make it any longer.
I understand there are entities on HC and maybe here, who are looking to manipulate weak hands, and while I find manipulative and dishonest actors to be loathsome, they are part of the landscape investors have to deal with, so DYOR and be clear about why you are holding, if you are strong in that you are well on the way.
I do not mean disrespect to anyone who posts here, but I honestly find the idea that so called negative posts (or posts that don't fit with the group think) are bad for BRN as an inability to deal with views that are incongruent with their own, and IMO it reflects a need for constant emotional support via confirmation bias - which IMO is not a realistically healthy way to approach investing.
There is a lot of confirmation bias going down here, and there is no problem with that necessarily, we all want to see the constant stream of research and opinion here confirmed by good outcomes, but it has to be tempered with a knowing that it actually may not work out - there are no guarantees.
Keeping your emotions in check is not only key to successful investing, it is also key to having a healthy life. I have noticed since the 4C, that this forum has divided somewhat along sectarian lines, and in some cases has devolved into name calling. A tolerant and well adjusted person has an innate ability to accept that there are "other" views, they do not have to be threatened by the fact that there are other views, and they are therefore able to accept that there are other views without having to be overly reactive; and just simply move on. And try to be respectful, this could be analogous to democracy, a place where different views and opinions are respected. Much better than a lot of the Orwellian BS out there these days.
What a raving lunatic I can be, but I am comfortable with it, and always looking to learn and have fun, I'll now go back to my quiet place and you may not hear from me for a while. Go BRN.
While looking at new security cameras I came across this, maybe absolutely nothing to do with us, but I did find this
product description rather interesting in the EUFY security camera.
Advanced AI detection
eufy Security 4G Starlight Camera features accurate motion detection and human detection. See that accuracy improves to 99% over time with AI self-learning.
Runs on no Wi-Fi and uses small batteries lasting around 3 months.
Interesting, maybe not.
product description rather interesting in the EUFY security camera.
Advanced AI detection
eufy Security 4G Starlight Camera features accurate motion detection and human detection. See that accuracy improves to 99% over time with AI self-learning.
Runs on no Wi-Fi and uses small batteries lasting around 3 months.
Interesting, maybe not.
Similar threads
