How does that explain the plural in “deployment on neuromorphic
chips”, though?
Sure, they could apparently run TENNs without Akida, eg on Intel’s Loihi instead, but why would they even bother when Akida is said to be the best fit for TENNs anyway?
And while we are at it:
How do you explain away the word
potential in “positioning for a potential collaboration with Mercedes” in a former BrainChip intern’s CV (referring to the time period June - August 2023)
cf.
https://thestockexchange.com.au/threads/brn-discussion-ongoing.1/post-423654
or Gerrit Ecke (Researcher for Future Automotive Software Development and for Neuromorphic Computing at MB) and Alexander Janisch (R&D Engineer AI and Neuromorphic Computing at MB) both liking a LinkedIn comment by Innatera’s CEO Sumeet Kumar three months ago, who had suggested to Magnus Östberg (Chief Software Officer Mercedes-Benz) that MB should also talk to Innatera regarding neuromorphic computing?
cf.
https://thestockexchange.com.au/threads/brn-discussion-ongoing.1/post-423467
or the fact that Mercedes-Benz CTO Markus Schäfer named both BrainChip and Intel as examples for “leading developers” in his post on neuromorphic computing in January 2023, more than a year after MB had told the whole world they had used Akida for making the EQXX’s ‘Hey Mercedes!” voice control five to ten times more efficient than conventional voice control. (Note the comparison did not relate to a competitor’s neuromorphic solution, but to conventional and hence von Neumann processors).
Closing the NDA curtains again after the January 2022 unveiling of Akida as the ultra-low power solution for their concept car’s voice control system would no longer have given Mercedes-Benz an advantage over rival carmakers, so why the secrecy ever since?
In my eyes, the only logical explanation is that the MB engineers in charge are still weighing their options.