What I would really like is a washable "cyber suit". Mock or turtle neck (for the voice / STT capture / control), EEG sensors, breathing rate, blood pressure, gestures via arm motion sensors,). Removable rechargeable battery module to wash the torso / shirt slap it on a clean one. For EEG it would have to be pretty compressed though, so not sure it would be comfortable enough to wear to sleep? maybe only an internal harness needs to be that compressed. not sure. I'm tired of wearing a Fitbit, or glasses, or these different things people have to look at, keep up with, break easy etc.
I think this is incredibly cool and straight out of a sci-fi novel! I think this is phenomenal for accessibility and for hands-free computing in general. I also agree with other comments that the website should have more detail on how it works, such as what you included in the post body. Amazing work guys!
I am so glad to see an unpolished early look and an honest evaluation of about five percent error rate in the YouTube video. The really cool stuff will be the applications on top of `subvocal` though at least in my opinion.
So this could take "noise canceling" to a whole new level if you could somehow "speak" across a loud bar or across the world, for that matter. Being integrated into something like Signal or similar end to end encrypted platform would be interesting as well.
Yep, I agree. Noise cancellation is a feature we want to release at some point in the future. Using the RF to denoise a very noisy audio signal which has you speaking in it. And we'll release an SDK as well a few months after shipping to build stuff on top of it!
Cue the resurgence of lip reading-based espionage. Imagining having to scan the room for people watching subvocalizers. Will subvocalizers start holding up a clipboard over their face a la NFL coaches?
That's already been a problem ever since people figured out you can recover voice from watching the subpixel vibration of objects within a room. (Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUzB0L0mSCI)
Most people type at 40-50 WPM. Developers can often type at 70-100 WPM. Meanwhile, most people can talk at 120-200 WPM. Beyond just speed, we've found with many people that talking things out tends to flow more naturally, since it's often a lower friction action so people don't "sanitize" the text in their head before outputting it. Leads to better prompts quite often :)
> talking things out tends to flow more naturally,
I've found the opposite. Typing feels much more "deliberate", and of course you can hit backspace but you can't un-speak a word. With prompting, I've found that, in general, speaking leads to lower-quality results than typing.
Not everyone. I, at least, definitely overthink what I type, and while I end up with nice-ish sentences in my prompts it takes a lot longer than a train of thought that the AI parses correctly most of the time anyway.
When I try talking for prompting my coding agents, I'm always severely disappointed with the specificity of the prompt. It's just much easier for me to "talk about" coding specifics with a keyboard than it is for me to speak about them, for some reason.
I suspect this has to do with the nature of the work you're doing; I dunno, just count me firmly in the camp of people who only rarely feel like I can express a thought sufficiently for coding agents with their voice.
I'm the same. I also can think ahead / along much better while typing. When I'm talking I'm just talking, not thinking as much.
But I guess thinking is going out of style anyway.
That said, I know a lot of people prefer talking to their computer, especially when their computer is a phone. So there is definitely a place for stuff like this.
You need to train yourself to speak written speech. When you do that, the thought processes behind typing your words activate, and your language use changes.
As a person who often talks far too fast and incoherently, but types generally fast and legibly, I had never recognised or even considered this, but it seems helpful. Thanks.
This has been an interesting thing for me to watch as it's such a case of people having widely different experiences. I'm sure people that didn't grow up on a keyboard like me can probably talk quicker than they type, but even aside from me being a fairly good typist my speech is held up by being a bit more halting, a bit more of backtracking on word choice, sometimes not quite the same 'voice' of writing as I'm aiming for, all of which obliterates any speed advantage it'd have for me.
But happy to see people get more options.
This reminds me of Eternity's End by Jeffrey Carver and the implants they had. Released in 2000 but the more time goes on the more the neural implant technology is coming about. To be fair I think Enders Game had similar tech to detect subvocal speech like this product.
> This has been an interesting thing for me to watch as it's such a case of people having widely different experiences.
Same. I'm often told I talk too fast, but I feel I communicate slowly because a lot of my fast speech involves halting and backtracking and such.
I can easily type 100WPM+, but I trivially blast out a few paragraphs of perfectly adequate text in a few seconds and then spend a few minutes re-editing it.
Yes, I'd estimate the vast majority of people speak faster they can type. Not sure about the thinking part because I usually have 20 threads going parallel in my head and can't imagine what normal thinking would be like.
With so many people singing the praises of voice to text, I keep thinking about how most sci-fi futures feature subvocalization as a prerec for that kind of adoption. Always love to see sci-fi come to life!
I had to look it up, I forgot he communicated with her through sub-vocalizations. I remember the jewel earpiece, but in my head he just communicated through thoughts or something.
Good reference! That series of books Is one of my all time favorites.
Super excited to see more products in this area. I talk to my computer the majority of the time now, and I can do that because I work from home. If I were on public transportation or in an office, it would be much more difficult. It's been interesting to watch the Overton window, if you will, shift for people talking _to_ their phones. Now, the majority of my family will use voice to text on their phone whereas I remember just a few years ago, if not even just a year ago, it was made fun of.
Should really just be like a leap motion device on the desk, glasses are so gimmicky and aren't gonna fly for people with prescriptions (a large set of people in-front of computers all day)
Very cool! I was curious to hear the details of how it worked but couldn’t find them on your landing page. I’m glad to see them here and you might want to include them more prominently on the page itself. I didn’t even realize it was a pair of glasses til I read the above.
E.g. your FAQ says it doesn’t use cameras but does not say what it does use. And when I got to the footer and clicked the “how it works” link, it seemingly took me back to the top of the page I had just read.
Yup we worked with IMUs as well when we started this. They measure aggregated face motion, so cannot distinguish between fine phonetic classes, only broad words. The open source demo got to a 5 word classifier, I believe. We tried a lot to make IMUs work too, in various form factors, but the signal doesn't contain enough information for open ended decoding beyond classifying between a few words. We would have loved to be able to just push software!
> There was this really interesting one where it reads your lips
This is what I thought the original post was about. The glasses you have to wear is where that lost me.
If we could get lip-reading via your computer/phone camera down perfectly, that's the real win. Making people wear your goofy frames is where you lose a massive portion of people. Nobody wants to look like Zuckerberg lol
Lip reading is one of the other modalities we tried as well beyond IMU, EMG and RF! We worked a lot on fine tuning Auto-AVSR, one of the most commonly used open source lipreading models. It's very enticing to work on, since it gets to about 17% word error rate, which looks good enough that you would think working on it further would get it down to product quality, but we found there's an information-theoretic limit on the modality. Speech has 40 phonemes, but only about 12 to 15 visemes (externally visually separable phonetic states). For example P and B look very similar from a camera. This causes the scaling laws on lipreading to flatten out at an error that's too high to be product ready but just low enough to make for a good demo. Our original plan was actually to ship a lipreading software to see if people would want this behavior, but we realized you couldn't make lipreading work!
this is super cool. I did some digging about current research on avsr using video and lip point cloud movement a while back. found projects like https://github.com/amanvirparhar/chaplin but this seems more promising!
I'm curious about whether this could be done with the hardware mounted on top of the laptop screen or on a stand on the desk, rather than the glasses form factor. Have you explored this?
Yes, we have! The same kind of RF doesn't work in that form, since it is attenuated strongly over that big of a distance. But the other interesting alternative we tried it mmWave radar, RF at about 60 GHz, the same band as 5G. This is much more similar to conventional radar, in that it would bounce off the face rather than passing through it like our current system. We found a few problems with this:
1. It faced the same issue as cameras. mmWave radar has a very low penetration in tissue, so it basically just bounced off the mouth. This only let us see visemes, which aren't enough to get to a low error rate as complete phonetic decoding can.
2. While mmWave radar can detect skin movement as small as a few microns via Doppler shift (given it's small wavelength), its spatial resolution with most systems is quite low. For example, it can tell that something moved 2 microns but within a 5cm x 5cm block. This coarse information makes it very hard to decode
That's why we weren't able to make something that can mount to your laptop. We're trying to make a necklace form factor at some point in the future though, but can't give a date on this!
I did research in this space about eight years ago. Our approach was to look at deformations in the ear canal. Rumor has it that Apple AirPods will have sensors in the ear canal. I was hoping to use those sensors with our app, but it looks like Apple is not going to provide access to the raw sensor data. I expected Apple is going to support subvocal speech pretty soon.
There is no human connection typing words into a box, that's seems like what it's mostly replacing. Talking to your email client, talking to your AI agent. Lots of us are much faster speaking than typing and especially with AI, it doesn't matter a whole lot in my experience how polished the output is, the benefit from ending up with a lot more text because one can just talk freely is very beneficial.
Maybe you don't want strangers around you hearing you say "Hey Claude wish my grandma happy birthday" as it's not yet morally okay to delegate such social tasks to the models
Aha what a loser thing to do, I personally have a fleet of 347 agents running 24/7 talking to my parents, siblings, grandparents, friends, asking them how they're doing and wishing them a happy birthday when the time comes. I can finally focus on the important things!
Your example proves their point perfectly. You shouldn't delegate wishing your grandma happy birthday to a fucking AI agent. And you should feel ashamed for doing so. And you should feel the social pressure to hide that fact if you do resort to it.
While this tech doesn't feel quite as dystopian as most recent AI innovations, I do think it is a further step in the direction of human disconnection.
I can see this being useful on public transport where you don't want to bother people while taking notes verbally. It's not all about avoiding connection.
No, the RF is very low power and can safely be active on your face for long periods. We've done a lot of investigation and verification with safety. While doing R&D the first 2 months we collected hundreds of hours of data on ourselves with various configurations, so we made sure it was safe before :)
Also, the RF transmission only activates when you're actively dictating.
Neat! I don't like talking to my computer (audibly or not), but that's a cool demo.
I wonder if we could eventually end up with a "throat muscle" version where people learn to talk a new way without having to move the visible mouth muscles too.
So it's a pair of glasses that can transcribe when you mouth words silently? I still don't know how it works, they say no cameras and it works with noise so I assume sort sort of reverse bone conducting?
I would be fairly interested if this works without opening my mouth. Like, if you can nail _micro_ tongue movements, it would feel pretty close to thought.
It actually can! Since the RF can see inside your mouth the system doesn't inherently need lip movements and can be fine tuned on what we call "internal speech". Note that this isn't the automatic tongue movements that occur when "thinking" words to yourself, but it's rather like mouthing with your lips closed. We don't often lead with this since it's weird for many people to do, but with a bit of practice, we have been able to get it down pretty well.
There's subtle changes in internal speech muscles as well often for those kinds of movements, and where it does seem ambiguous language context is usually enough to distinguish
Spent 30 seconds scrolling down to try to figure out what this is. Eventually clicked away from the site because it was taking too long to get to the point. I'm sure it's great and I understand it's something to do with glasses and subvocalizations, but consider a one sentence contextualization at the top of the page.
I was just trying to help a vibe coder and immediately noticed that their README.md was over 2,000 lines long. I asked, "Why is your readme so long?" and their response was, "This is just a really complicated application."
The app essentially manages a bunch of TODO items written in markdown.
For some reason AI coding agents seem to think a README should be a Product Requirements Document (PRD).
I think it's because most projects don't have any settled place (or at least, any place that lives inside the project's source-code repo) to record PRD-like information.
But because AI coding agents really do benefit from having PRD-like info (i.e. a hierarchical breakdown of the "intended what" and "intended how" of the system that "should" exist in the repo, kept updated to reflect changing ideas about those intentions), they really want to record that type of info somewhere, so they can then reference it.
AI coding agents don't seem to have any "taste" (or maybe "confidence"?) when it comes to asserting that even if you don't already have a separate PRD-like file in the repo, you should have one, if you want the agent to do its job well, and so it would request you to let it create one (or just automatically do it.) Instead, they just shrug and cram the PRD stuff into whatever structure you do already have. Which, if you're starting fresh with a greenfield project, is usually just a README.
(I hypothesize that if you tell an AI coding agent to use Behavior-Driven Development [BDD] on a greenfield project, it'll probably lean toward maintaining its PRD-like info in the form of BDD test cases. Haven't tried this experiment yet; would be interested to know the outcome!)
That is exactly what happened in this case; the readme was the PRD.
Throughout the document Claude kept claiming that issues were "mitigated but not fixed". They were essentially bandaid fixes for things it couldn't figure out. When I pointed this out to the author he said, "Well Claude thinks it works."
I wonder what happens to software when enough people try to ship projects like this.
I've thought about learning sign language in order to communicate with the computer in a not-super-annoying way. Your solution... much more realistic. Cheers.
That is fascinating. How do the radio waves get modulated? Do you think it is possible to use this technique for spying technology, with remote transmitters and receivers intersecting a person's facial anatomy to pick up the details of even a whispered or muttered conversation?
Most probably not possible to do this remotely, since this kind of RF needs to be transmitted through the face, and if you transmit them from too far away very few of them will actually take a path that goes through the face and comes back to your receiver.
They get modulated since your mouth is a complex dielectric environment. Tissue, water, and air have different dielectric constants (different permittivity to RF) and the motion of the muscles in this medium leads to interactions with the waves that fill it, changing their phase and amplitude as they propagate.
Let's go! Love the idea. Like the analog to bone conduction earbuds. Just please don't turn into WisprFlow where they route the voice metadata, unbeknownst to many, to a third party partner who stores and mines it for who-knows-what.
Good luck fellas.
This is very cool, but oddly, the site is TOO focused on the user problem being solved to the extent that it feels like snake oil. The issue is that this is contrary to people's experience of what is possible, so without discussing WHY you can do this, it looks like a scam or vaporware.
The tech sounds cool, but my guess is this product might work for anyone whose text to command ratio is very high. If the formatting and commanding are the main tasks, then this product would be more of a distraction for a fast typist.
Regarding the website, you should lead with product, its details, rather than founders shown in 360 degrees from various vantage points. It is distracting and frankly irritating.
Why do you destroy communicating your very cool product with an annoying and counter intuitive scroll experience?
And after some time I could not figure out what this is?
Put this part: " building smart glasses that let you talk to your computer without talking out loud. You can mouth words silently and discreetly and the glasses decode them to text at the speed of speech."
right at the top and show someone doing that instead of hiding behind cryptic marketing.
There is a product by Subtle called Voicebuds that allows for super silent dictation. Looks like the product is not available for purchase yet, but I would prefer to have earbuds over glasses.
Infuriating website UX, you really must add the scrollbar back. Apple do shiny things like this but they know you can't get rid of the scrollbar and piss people off trying to look at information
How have the glasses been received? I don't understand why they're required, is it only to have a consistent mount point for the radar sensor, relative to the face? Have you thought about a throat mic?
It looked like there was a throat mic in the first shot... it seems counterintuitive that you'd get better performance out of lidar on face muscles than on a throat mic.
No throat mic, the first image uses EMG (muscle electrical signal) sensors. A throat mic only works if you're still actually whispering (not fully silent) and is also a weird form factor for a consumer device, which is why we didn't go with it!
They are claiming 200+ wpm on a prototype. Half that speed would put you in the top tier of typists, and the number of people that get anywhere close to 200 is vanishingly small.
FYI, the subvocal.company site is unscrollable with a mouse wheel in WebKit browsers on Mac (Safari, DDG, Kagi Orion), though the touchpad will work. No issues elsewhere (Mac non-WebKit, Win11, Ubuntu)
p.s. Especially please don't do this when a thread is brand new. Such comments are the easiest to post, and therefore the quickest to appear, but by posting them, you steer the discussion straight away from the curious, thoughtful conversation we want here. Threads are extremely sensitive to initial conditions, so this is important.
There is a long way from a prototype to production. Remember Google Glasses, Oculus, Meta Rayban, Apple Vision Pro?
All of them are visionary and we would think that ppl gonna like them…
Well… ordinary people want boring tech.
This will be similar with whispering to glasses… Visionaries will like it… and return to missionary (boring) s*x (I hope that I don’t get a ban.)
Myself, I would buy these glasses immediately. But I would hate them as well as I would think I am insane (who wants to talk to yourself?).
Edit: Dang replied. I wish all the best to the team behind “whisper glasses”. It is amazing. Connect it with ElevenLabs and you rule the world. (Previous: It wasn’t meant a hate speech.)
This wasn’t meant as a hate. Sorry if it sound so. I really like them, I would buy them. Immediately. Sign me in.
But I think (and see) that people prefer boring tech. Whisper glasses is amazing. But most people will probably find it creepy. (Pareto applied.). I hope I am wrong. These guys are like from sci-fi.
What I would really like is a washable "cyber suit". Mock or turtle neck (for the voice / STT capture / control), EEG sensors, breathing rate, blood pressure, gestures via arm motion sensors,). Removable rechargeable battery module to wash the torso / shirt slap it on a clean one. For EEG it would have to be pretty compressed though, so not sure it would be comfortable enough to wear to sleep? maybe only an internal harness needs to be that compressed. not sure. I'm tired of wearing a Fitbit, or glasses, or these different things people have to look at, keep up with, break easy etc.
I think this is incredibly cool and straight out of a sci-fi novel! I think this is phenomenal for accessibility and for hands-free computing in general. I also agree with other comments that the website should have more detail on how it works, such as what you included in the post body. Amazing work guys!
Yea in one of the further Ender's Game novels they talk about this tech a lot for characters silently mumbling to the AI.
Ahhhh exactly! I've wanted this since I was a kid and read those books.
I wonder if in a couple of years we gonna have some teeth implant that will capture sounds to our devices.
I am so glad to see an unpolished early look and an honest evaluation of about five percent error rate in the YouTube video. The really cool stuff will be the applications on top of `subvocal` though at least in my opinion.
So this could take "noise canceling" to a whole new level if you could somehow "speak" across a loud bar or across the world, for that matter. Being integrated into something like Signal or similar end to end encrypted platform would be interesting as well.
Yep, I agree. Noise cancellation is a feature we want to release at some point in the future. Using the RF to denoise a very noisy audio signal which has you speaking in it. And we'll release an SDK as well a few months after shipping to build stuff on top of it!
Cue the resurgence of lip reading-based espionage. Imagining having to scan the room for people watching subvocalizers. Will subvocalizers start holding up a clipboard over their face a la NFL coaches?
That's already been a problem ever since people figured out you can recover voice from watching the subpixel vibration of objects within a room. (Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eUzB0L0mSCI)
There is a reason secure activity happens within secured rooms built to a specific standard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensitive_compartmented_inform...
Do most people talk faster than they can type? It's the opposite for me - I also read aloud slower than I can read in my head.
Most people type at 40-50 WPM. Developers can often type at 70-100 WPM. Meanwhile, most people can talk at 120-200 WPM. Beyond just speed, we've found with many people that talking things out tends to flow more naturally, since it's often a lower friction action so people don't "sanitize" the text in their head before outputting it. Leads to better prompts quite often :)
[delayed]
> talking things out tends to flow more naturally,
I've found the opposite. Typing feels much more "deliberate", and of course you can hit backspace but you can't un-speak a word. With prompting, I've found that, in general, speaking leads to lower-quality results than typing.
The bit before your quote was
> with many people
Not everyone. I, at least, definitely overthink what I type, and while I end up with nice-ish sentences in my prompts it takes a lot longer than a train of thought that the AI parses correctly most of the time anyway.
When I try talking for prompting my coding agents, I'm always severely disappointed with the specificity of the prompt. It's just much easier for me to "talk about" coding specifics with a keyboard than it is for me to speak about them, for some reason.
I suspect this has to do with the nature of the work you're doing; I dunno, just count me firmly in the camp of people who only rarely feel like I can express a thought sufficiently for coding agents with their voice.
Yeah, we have a lot of experience with typing while our eyes and mind are occupied elsewhere. But I've noticed the years have slowed my typing.
On my phone, I do. I still like to tap with my thumbs, but my iPhone keyboard sucks so when I need to type a lot, I’d rather dictate.
I'm the same. I also can think ahead / along much better while typing. When I'm talking I'm just talking, not thinking as much.
But I guess thinking is going out of style anyway.
That said, I know a lot of people prefer talking to their computer, especially when their computer is a phone. So there is definitely a place for stuff like this.
You need to train yourself to speak written speech. When you do that, the thought processes behind typing your words activate, and your language use changes.
As a person who often talks far too fast and incoherently, but types generally fast and legibly, I had never recognised or even considered this, but it seems helpful. Thanks.
Why bother when old ways work _and_ there is no benefit? Or name one.
How?
Most people talk faster than they can type. 80 wpm voice chat is easy for everyone. 80 wpm typing filters out most typists.
This has been an interesting thing for me to watch as it's such a case of people having widely different experiences. I'm sure people that didn't grow up on a keyboard like me can probably talk quicker than they type, but even aside from me being a fairly good typist my speech is held up by being a bit more halting, a bit more of backtracking on word choice, sometimes not quite the same 'voice' of writing as I'm aiming for, all of which obliterates any speed advantage it'd have for me.
But happy to see people get more options.
This reminds me of Eternity's End by Jeffrey Carver and the implants they had. Released in 2000 but the more time goes on the more the neural implant technology is coming about. To be fair I think Enders Game had similar tech to detect subvocal speech like this product.
> This has been an interesting thing for me to watch as it's such a case of people having widely different experiences.
Same. I'm often told I talk too fast, but I feel I communicate slowly because a lot of my fast speech involves halting and backtracking and such.
I can easily type 100WPM+, but I trivially blast out a few paragraphs of perfectly adequate text in a few seconds and then spend a few minutes re-editing it.
Writing also filters the useless crap that is spoken but is not worth writing down.
Yes, I'd estimate the vast majority of people speak faster they can type. Not sure about the thinking part because I usually have 20 threads going parallel in my head and can't imagine what normal thinking would be like.
While sitting at the desk, I type about as fast as I talk. While unloading the dishwasher I'm a much faster talker than typer
I'm not reading aloud most of the time that I'm talking.
You can have a silent conversation with someone else wearing the device? This does not bode well for casinos.
With so many people singing the praises of voice to text, I keep thinking about how most sci-fi futures feature subvocalization as a prerec for that kind of adoption. Always love to see sci-fi come to life!
One of the coolest things I have recently seen but would love some details. It also got me thinking a about this recent Neuralink post.
https://neuralink.com/updates/72-hour-voice-hackathon/
I'm more looking for the Jane from Speaker for the Dead version. In-ear device that can hear and feel the subvocalization.
I had to look it up, I forgot he communicated with her through sub-vocalizations. I remember the jewel earpiece, but in my head he just communicated through thoughts or something.
Good reference! That series of books Is one of my all time favorites.
First, this my favorite book of all time so I love seeing it shouted out
Second, I agree with exactly this. Something shaped like an AirPod
Super excited to see more products in this area. I talk to my computer the majority of the time now, and I can do that because I work from home. If I were on public transportation or in an office, it would be much more difficult. It's been interesting to watch the Overton window, if you will, shift for people talking _to_ their phones. Now, the majority of my family will use voice to text on their phone whereas I remember just a few years ago, if not even just a year ago, it was made fun of.
Should really just be like a leap motion device on the desk, glasses are so gimmicky and aren't gonna fly for people with prescriptions (a large set of people in-front of computers all day)
half of the other people in the office in the video are wearing prescription glasses
People with prescriptions can just get versions with prescriptions in them (this is a thing for "smart" glasses already).
Can, but as a new product it is going to limit their adoption rate by some pretty significant amount.
Very cool! I was curious to hear the details of how it worked but couldn’t find them on your landing page. I’m glad to see them here and you might want to include them more prominently on the page itself. I didn’t even realize it was a pair of glasses til I read the above.
E.g. your FAQ says it doesn’t use cameras but does not say what it does use. And when I got to the footer and clicked the “how it works” link, it seemingly took me back to the top of the page I had just read.
Someone built an open-source version of this, but it’s far from polished:
https://github.com/joeblau/subvox
There was this really interesting one where it reads your lips:
https://github.com/amywork777/lipflow
I’m using these to build my own so I can work in co-working spaces, planes, and libraries. Though moving my mouth with no words might draw some eyes.
Yup we worked with IMUs as well when we started this. They measure aggregated face motion, so cannot distinguish between fine phonetic classes, only broad words. The open source demo got to a 5 word classifier, I believe. We tried a lot to make IMUs work too, in various form factors, but the signal doesn't contain enough information for open ended decoding beyond classifying between a few words. We would have loved to be able to just push software!
> There was this really interesting one where it reads your lips
This is what I thought the original post was about. The glasses you have to wear is where that lost me.
If we could get lip-reading via your computer/phone camera down perfectly, that's the real win. Making people wear your goofy frames is where you lose a massive portion of people. Nobody wants to look like Zuckerberg lol
Lip reading is one of the other modalities we tried as well beyond IMU, EMG and RF! We worked a lot on fine tuning Auto-AVSR, one of the most commonly used open source lipreading models. It's very enticing to work on, since it gets to about 17% word error rate, which looks good enough that you would think working on it further would get it down to product quality, but we found there's an information-theoretic limit on the modality. Speech has 40 phonemes, but only about 12 to 15 visemes (externally visually separable phonetic states). For example P and B look very similar from a camera. This causes the scaling laws on lipreading to flatten out at an error that's too high to be product ready but just low enough to make for a good demo. Our original plan was actually to ship a lipreading software to see if people would want this behavior, but we realized you couldn't make lipreading work!
Why not a pencil in the ear or something you can put in a shirt pocket? Or even earbuds?
Now that is insightful! The demo definitely fooled me and even the first repo requires you to train the model.
Lip reading AI would be pretty big since privacy would probably go out the window.
Any deaf/HoH person who has tried to do lipreading could have told you all of this too.
Good luck on the project!
this is super cool. I did some digging about current research on avsr using video and lip point cloud movement a while back. found projects like https://github.com/amanvirparhar/chaplin but this seems more promising!
I'm curious about whether this could be done with the hardware mounted on top of the laptop screen or on a stand on the desk, rather than the glasses form factor. Have you explored this?
Yes, we have! The same kind of RF doesn't work in that form, since it is attenuated strongly over that big of a distance. But the other interesting alternative we tried it mmWave radar, RF at about 60 GHz, the same band as 5G. This is much more similar to conventional radar, in that it would bounce off the face rather than passing through it like our current system. We found a few problems with this: 1. It faced the same issue as cameras. mmWave radar has a very low penetration in tissue, so it basically just bounced off the mouth. This only let us see visemes, which aren't enough to get to a low error rate as complete phonetic decoding can. 2. While mmWave radar can detect skin movement as small as a few microns via Doppler shift (given it's small wavelength), its spatial resolution with most systems is quite low. For example, it can tell that something moved 2 microns but within a 5cm x 5cm block. This coarse information makes it very hard to decode
That's why we weren't able to make something that can mount to your laptop. We're trying to make a necklace form factor at some point in the future though, but can't give a date on this!
What about something like a baseball cap instead of glasses? Or some sort of head band?
Exploring that too as a next product, but probably a while down the line!
How about a cap with a propellor on it that spins when receiving words :)
Great work!
Really like seeing the early prototypes here, and would love to see more on how the RF tech works on the website.
Are you able to patent it?
This is super cool. I think it's the first piece of additional hardware I've even considered pre-ordering.
I did research in this space about eight years ago. Our approach was to look at deformations in the ear canal. Rumor has it that Apple AirPods will have sensors in the ear canal. I was hoping to use those sensors with our app, but it looks like Apple is not going to provide access to the raw sensor data. I expected Apple is going to support subvocal speech pretty soon.
What's wrong with human connection and speaking. :( I feel like the isolation of this modern world is lame.
There is no human connection typing words into a box, that's seems like what it's mostly replacing. Talking to your email client, talking to your AI agent. Lots of us are much faster speaking than typing and especially with AI, it doesn't matter a whole lot in my experience how polished the output is, the benefit from ending up with a lot more text because one can just talk freely is very beneficial.
Maybe you don't want strangers around you hearing you say "Hey Claude wish my grandma happy birthday" as it's not yet morally okay to delegate such social tasks to the models
Aha what a loser thing to do, I personally have a fleet of 347 agents running 24/7 talking to my parents, siblings, grandparents, friends, asking them how they're doing and wishing them a happy birthday when the time comes. I can finally focus on the important things!
Your example proves their point perfectly. You shouldn't delegate wishing your grandma happy birthday to a fucking AI agent. And you should feel ashamed for doing so. And you should feel the social pressure to hide that fact if you do resort to it.
While this tech doesn't feel quite as dystopian as most recent AI innovations, I do think it is a further step in the direction of human disconnection.
Well you both prove each other’s point ;)
Haha, I can't tell if this is a parody or not
I can see this being useful on public transport where you don't want to bother people while taking notes verbally. It's not all about avoiding connection.
This is more a keyboard killer than a dinner party killer.
This is a little like replying to a show HN for a new kind of stylus input device with “what’s wrong with pen and paper”
Are there any health risks with this method?
Edit: mostly concerned about RF near my eyes for 8 hours a day.
No, the RF is very low power and can safely be active on your face for long periods. We've done a lot of investigation and verification with safety. While doing R&D the first 2 months we collected hundreds of hours of data on ourselves with various configurations, so we made sure it was safe before :)
Also, the RF transmission only activates when you're actively dictating.
Yeah, so a recent study discovered that talking silently makes other people harder to hear you so they think they have problem hearing.
Sensorimotor debility is a thing. This gadget surely won't help with it.
Neat! I don't like talking to my computer (audibly or not), but that's a cool demo.
I wonder if we could eventually end up with a "throat muscle" version where people learn to talk a new way without having to move the visible mouth muscles too.
So it's a pair of glasses that can transcribe when you mouth words silently? I still don't know how it works, they say no cameras and it works with noise so I assume sort sort of reverse bone conducting?
The whole paragraph above explains it. Radio through your head.
Says right in the description that they are using radio
I would be fairly interested if this works without opening my mouth. Like, if you can nail _micro_ tongue movements, it would feel pretty close to thought.
It actually can! Since the RF can see inside your mouth the system doesn't inherently need lip movements and can be fine tuned on what we call "internal speech". Note that this isn't the automatic tongue movements that occur when "thinking" words to yourself, but it's rather like mouthing with your lips closed. We don't often lead with this since it's weird for many people to do, but with a bit of practice, we have been able to get it down pretty well.
Wow that's fascinating. I've added that bit to your text above - I hope that's ok! It answers what was emerging as a sort of mini-FAQ.
Edit: the more that I think about it the cooler and more important this feature seems!
[dead]
But how would you distinguish all the sounds that don’t require any tongue movement, like (most of?) the vowels?
There's subtle changes in internal speech muscles as well often for those kinds of movements, and where it does seem ambiguous language context is usually enough to distinguish
Spent 30 seconds scrolling down to try to figure out what this is. Eventually clicked away from the site because it was taking too long to get to the point. I'm sure it's great and I understand it's something to do with glasses and subvocalizations, but consider a one sentence contextualization at the top of the page.
I was just trying to help a vibe coder and immediately noticed that their README.md was over 2,000 lines long. I asked, "Why is your readme so long?" and their response was, "This is just a really complicated application."
The app essentially manages a bunch of TODO items written in markdown.
For some reason AI coding agents seem to think a README should be a Product Requirements Document (PRD).
I think it's because most projects don't have any settled place (or at least, any place that lives inside the project's source-code repo) to record PRD-like information.
But because AI coding agents really do benefit from having PRD-like info (i.e. a hierarchical breakdown of the "intended what" and "intended how" of the system that "should" exist in the repo, kept updated to reflect changing ideas about those intentions), they really want to record that type of info somewhere, so they can then reference it.
AI coding agents don't seem to have any "taste" (or maybe "confidence"?) when it comes to asserting that even if you don't already have a separate PRD-like file in the repo, you should have one, if you want the agent to do its job well, and so it would request you to let it create one (or just automatically do it.) Instead, they just shrug and cram the PRD stuff into whatever structure you do already have. Which, if you're starting fresh with a greenfield project, is usually just a README.
(I hypothesize that if you tell an AI coding agent to use Behavior-Driven Development [BDD] on a greenfield project, it'll probably lean toward maintaining its PRD-like info in the form of BDD test cases. Haven't tried this experiment yet; would be interested to know the outcome!)
That is exactly what happened in this case; the readme was the PRD.
Throughout the document Claude kept claiming that issues were "mitigated but not fixed". They were essentially bandaid fixes for things it couldn't figure out. When I pointed this out to the author he said, "Well Claude thinks it works."
I wonder what happens to software when enough people try to ship projects like this.
Yup that makes sense. Thanks for the feedback, we'll make some changes shortly!
> Talk without talking. > Input text at the speed of speech, silently and invisibly.
I understood from just this. But the demo video impressed even further.
> Spent 30 seconds scrolling down to try to figure out what this is.
Did you try reading the site? Or maybe doing something other than just scrolling?
Does it need some form of subway surfer to get you to pay attention?
> Eventually clicked away from the site because it was taking too long to get to the point.
So yeah... subway surfer. This generation is cooked.
I use the Vekta. I tried whispering and it doesn't feel right.
Throat mics don't work at all - see reviews online.
This is a different approach, so I am cautiously optimistic.
I've thought about learning sign language in order to communicate with the computer in a not-super-annoying way. Your solution... much more realistic. Cheers.
Great idea, if only we could use our hands and fingers to input information into the computer
That is fascinating. How do the radio waves get modulated? Do you think it is possible to use this technique for spying technology, with remote transmitters and receivers intersecting a person's facial anatomy to pick up the details of even a whispered or muttered conversation?
Most probably not possible to do this remotely, since this kind of RF needs to be transmitted through the face, and if you transmit them from too far away very few of them will actually take a path that goes through the face and comes back to your receiver.
They get modulated since your mouth is a complex dielectric environment. Tissue, water, and air have different dielectric constants (different permittivity to RF) and the motion of the muscles in this medium leads to interactions with the waves that fill it, changing their phase and amplitude as they propagate.
Reminds me of the Leap Motion I preordered
Let's go! Love the idea. Like the analog to bone conduction earbuds. Just please don't turn into WisprFlow where they route the voice metadata, unbeknownst to many, to a third party partner who stores and mines it for who-knows-what. Good luck fellas.
Of course! Privacy is important!
This is very cool, but oddly, the site is TOO focused on the user problem being solved to the extent that it feels like snake oil. The issue is that this is contrary to people's experience of what is possible, so without discussing WHY you can do this, it looks like a scam or vaporware.
Fair feedback, will take into account. Looking to change up the site quite a bit soon!
The tech sounds cool, but my guess is this product might work for anyone whose text to command ratio is very high. If the formatting and commanding are the main tasks, then this product would be more of a distraction for a fast typist.
Regarding the website, you should lead with product, its details, rather than founders shown in 360 degrees from various vantage points. It is distracting and frankly irritating.
Does the model require internet access, or is it running entirely locally?
Just scroll normally!
Category: A product, that's obviously useful, as long as it will work.
Why do you destroy communicating your very cool product with an annoying and counter intuitive scroll experience?
And after some time I could not figure out what this is?
Put this part: " building smart glasses that let you talk to your computer without talking out loud. You can mouth words silently and discreetly and the glasses decode them to text at the speed of speech."
right at the top and show someone doing that instead of hiding behind cryptic marketing.
Also, the product looks great.
Get your words out of the way 'say what it is'.
Very amazing tech though
That makes sense. We will implement that!
God do I hate websites that make you scroll to go through an animation, why do people still do this
It is frustrating and makes me close a lot of sites
There is a product by Subtle called Voicebuds that allows for super silent dictation. Looks like the product is not available for purchase yet, but I would prefer to have earbuds over glasses.
https://www.subtle.co
Apple recently a purchased a company with seemingly equivalent technical capabilities:
https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/apple-qai-ac...
Hope you guys are well-positioned patent-wise.
Infuriating website UX, you really must add the scrollbar back. Apple do shiny things like this but they know you can't get rid of the scrollbar and piss people off trying to look at information
How have the glasses been received? I don't understand why they're required, is it only to have a consistent mount point for the radar sensor, relative to the face? Have you thought about a throat mic?
It looked like there was a throat mic in the first shot... it seems counterintuitive that you'd get better performance out of lidar on face muscles than on a throat mic.
No throat mic, the first image uses EMG (muscle electrical signal) sensors. A throat mic only works if you're still actually whispering (not fully silent) and is also a weird form factor for a consumer device, which is why we didn't go with it!
Watched the demo video… and if this is satire: incredibly well executed
Talk about over engineering a problem! If typing speed is an issue guess what, humans can train themselves to type really fast on a keyboard.
They are claiming 200+ wpm on a prototype. Half that speed would put you in the top tier of typists, and the number of people that get anywhere close to 200 is vanishingly small.
It depends on what you’re typing. If you’re coding, it’s probably faster to type `{}[]();|` or 2,450,712 than to say it.
I have some news for you about typing code by hand...
I think the problem to solve here is repetitive stress injury caused by typing
In this case, I think the problem to solve is ergonomic issues with the keyboards used for typing
FYI, the subvocal.company site is unscrollable with a mouse wheel in WebKit browsers on Mac (Safari, DDG, Kagi Orion), though the touchpad will work. No issues elsewhere (Mac non-WebKit, Win11, Ubuntu)
Looking into it
[dead]
[dead]
EDIT: I find talking in that manner in a public setup to be awkward and unpleasant, maybe that's just me.
That said, I think the idea of having a private walkie-talkie that connects on its own frequency for large crowded spaces to be very cool
> I like it but I don't want it, I'm not sure, it feels weird and cringy.
"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
p.s. Especially please don't do this when a thread is brand new. Such comments are the easiest to post, and therefore the quickest to appear, but by posting them, you steer the discussion straight away from the curious, thoughtful conversation we want here. Threads are extremely sensitive to initial conditions, so this is important.
Apologies, I edited, can you tell me if my edit is ok? EDIT: happy to delete and repost my edit instead too
It's better. I've turned off the flag.
There is a long way from a prototype to production. Remember Google Glasses, Oculus, Meta Rayban, Apple Vision Pro?
All of them are visionary and we would think that ppl gonna like them…
Well… ordinary people want boring tech.
This will be similar with whispering to glasses… Visionaries will like it… and return to missionary (boring) s*x (I hope that I don’t get a ban.)
Myself, I would buy these glasses immediately. But I would hate them as well as I would think I am insane (who wants to talk to yourself?).
Edit: Dang replied. I wish all the best to the team behind “whisper glasses”. It is amazing. Connect it with ElevenLabs and you rule the world. (Previous: It wasn’t meant a hate speech.)
(Don't worry, we're not going to ban you.)
A tasteless sex reference is one thing, but shallow-curmudgeonly dismissal of new work is the real sin here!
This wasn’t meant as a hate. Sorry if it sound so. I really like them, I would buy them. Immediately. Sign me in.
But I think (and see) that people prefer boring tech. Whisper glasses is amazing. But most people will probably find it creepy. (Pareto applied.). I hope I am wrong. These guys are like from sci-fi.