2 ms·

Seems like an overall well-intentioned founder story. Wondering if there are Luxonis people out there who can address the below? Would like to give the benefit

Seems like an overall well-intentioned founder story. Wondering if there are Luxonis people out there who can address the below? Would like to give the benefit of the doubt here to the CEO and Intel, but being weary of Intel’s past “hacker friendly” blowharding and subsequent total abandonment of the hacker community with the Edison, I do wonder whether Intel is again playing the mafioso; the wording of this quote from the Luxonis CEO comes off, to me at least, as kissing the ring, > “DepthAI, powered by Intel Movidius Myriad technology, is making it tractable.” Also wonder about the nature of the open source software the article refers to, > The Luxonis CEO said that the SoM works with a wealth of code that the company has open-sourced through an MIT license. Is the software running on the Myriad X itself open source, or just the SDK interfacing with it from the host machine? If the former, pretty amazing they were able to get Intel to agree to this, as I imagine the chip details are under strict NDA. If the latter, it seems pretty disingenuous to refer to the SOM software as “open source,” at least not with a footnote that the most interesting part (the spatial depth calculation) is not, presuming that’s done on the Myriad X.

Luxonis-Brandon 6y ago
Thanks for the kind words. Brandon the founder here. :-) So although I could see how that quote could appear like that, the quote is not kissing the ring. We scoured the whole semiconductor start up scene to find a chip that could be used for this. There are only 2 chips (as I'm aware, as of this writing) that can be used in such a way: 1. Intel Movidius Myriad X 2. Inuitive NU4000AI. And the Inuitive, until super recently (i.e. 1.5 years after we have already built hardware off the Myriad X) was not ready to be used (had tape-out issues at the fab). So this made the Myriad X the only chip that (1) had the capabilities needed and (2) was actually available and in production. In terms of our open-source nature, the latter is what we've implemented - where we have closed source binaries running on the Myriad X - which then have a slew of open-source counterparts on the host. Sorry if this came off disingenuous. Do you have advice on how to phrase it in a better way? https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-hardware https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-hardware - DepthAI hardware designs themselves. https://github.com/luxonis/depthai https://github.com/luxonis/depthai - Python Interface and Examples https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-api https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-api - C++ Core and C++ API https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-ml-training https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-ml-training - Online AI/ML training leveraging Google Colab (so it’s free) https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-experiments https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-experiments - Experiments showing how to use DepthAI. The above includes open source hardware, core capabilities in C++ which can be cross-compiled for various hosts, and open-source training notebooks and use-case examples. So the goal of open-sourcing all that we can (including hardware) is to enable folks who have their own applications to leverage this, modify it, use it, etc. w/out having to even talk to us. We cannot open-source the code that runs on the Myriad X however, as then we wouldn't have a way to monetize, and would have to give up on the mission. (That, and we're also not allowed to.) Thoughts? Thanks, Brandon

Luxonis-Brandon 6y ago

Thanks for the kind words. Brandon the founder here. :-) So although I could see how that quote could appear like that, the quote is not kissing the ring. We scoured the whole semiconductor start up scene to find a chip that could be used for this. There are only 2 chips (as I'm aware, as of this writing) that can be used in such a way: 1. Intel Movidius Myriad X 2. Inuitive NU4000AI. And the Inuitive, until super recently (i.e. 1.5 years after we have already built hardware off the Myriad X) was not ready to be used (had tape-out issues at the fab). So this made the Myriad X the only chip that (1) had the capabilities needed and (2) was actually available and in production. In terms of our open-source nature, the latter is what we've implemented - where we have closed source binaries running on the Myriad X - which then have a slew of open-source counterparts on the host. Sorry if this came off disingenuous. Do you have advice on how to phrase it in a better way? https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-hardware https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-hardware - DepthAI hardware designs themselves. https://github.com/luxonis/depthai https://github.com/luxonis/depthai - Python Interface and Examples https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-api https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-api - C++ Core and C++ API https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-ml-training https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-ml-training - Online AI/ML training leveraging Google Colab (so it’s free) https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-experiments https://github.com/luxonis/depthai-experiments - Experiments showing how to use DepthAI. The above includes open source hardware, core capabilities in C++ which can be cross-compiled for various hosts, and open-source training notebooks and use-case examples. So the goal of open-sourcing all that we can (including hardware) is to enable folks who have their own applications to leverage this, modify it, use it, etc. w/out having to even talk to us. We cannot open-source the code that runs on the Myriad X however, as then we wouldn't have a way to monetize, and would have to give up on the mission. (That, and we're also not allowed to.) Thoughts? Thanks, Brandon