Slashdot Mirror


Amazon Is Designing Custom AI Chips For Alexa (theverge.com)

According to a report (paywalled) from The Information, Amazon is designing a custom artificial intelligence chip that would power future Echo devices and improve the quality and response time of its Alexa voice assistant. "The move closely followers rivals Apple and Google, both of which have already developed and deployed custom AI hardware at various scales," reports The Verge. From the report: While Amazon is unlikely to physically produce the chips, given its lack of both fabrication experience and a manufacturing presence in China, the news does pose a risk to the businesses of companies like Nvidia and Intel. Both companies have shifted large portions of their chipmaking expertise to AI and the future of the burgeoning field, and both make money by designing and manufacturing chips for companies like Apple, Amazon, and others. Amazon, which seeks to stay competitive in the smart home hardware market and in the realm of consumer-facing AI products, has nearly 450 people with chip expertise on staff, reports The Information, thanks to key hires and acquisitions the e-commerce giant has made in the last few years. The plan is for Amazon to develop its own AI chips so Alexa-powered products in its ever-expanding Echo line can do more on-device processing, instead of having to communicate with the cloud, a process that increases response rate times.

70 comments

  1. So the reduced latency is worth... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... around $100 million?

    Wow.

  2. Its already perfectly possible to do speech ... by Viol8 · · Score: 2

    ... recognition in a standalone device with current hardware. Did amazon skimp on alexas spec?

    Also smartphones have more than enough power to do it too (look at the realtime video image recognition they can do for example) and so I can only assume the reason Siri (and whatever android has) send the speech to be processed in the cloud is for data capture purposes, not because the devices themselves are not up to it.

    1. Re:Its already perfectly possible to do speech ... by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      Also smartphones have more than enough power to do it too (look at the realtime video image recognition they can do for example) and so I can only assume the reason Siri (and whatever android has) send the speech to be processed in the cloud is for data capture purposes, not because the devices themselves are not up to i

      Google and Amazon yes, Siri less so. Google and Amazon sell your data, so having more of it is beneficial for them. Apple doesn't, and having your data is a liability (law enforcement). Siri nowadays does as much as possible on-device (especially with things like SiriKit so apps can hook into local device recognition). The distinction isn't completely clear when Siri will reach out for cloud support and when it wouldn't (some queries will go out regardless, and I suppose the hard to recognize voices will be saved on Apple's server per the privacy policy to improve recognition support).

  3. Just by M0j0_j0j0 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriosly.. who wants this Alexa shite?

    1. Re:Just by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a lot of people, not including you, apparently

    2. Re:Just by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Amazon

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    3. Re:Just by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh wow! So insightful!

    4. Re:Just by justthinkit · · Score: 1

      Imagine you are quadraplegic. I can assure you that about half your day is tied up with "activities of daily living" that force you to be away from a keyboard. Getting the picture?

      --
      I come here for the love
    5. Re: Just by Reverend+Green · · Score: 1

      Who wouldn't want it?

      You too can have your very own AI minder, watching your every move, listening to all your conversations! It's just like living in North Korea - and it can be yours for only $99.99. Order today!

    6. Re:Just by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      a lot of fucking idiots, not including you, apparently

      ftfy

    7. Re:Just by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Seriosly.. who wants this Alexa shite?

      Plenty of people want it. More than 25 million devices have been sold so far.

    8. Re: Just by dj245 · · Score: 1

      Many of the new products we have today are the result of filling a market for the disabled or the elderly. Many as-seen-on-tv products are good examples of this. The Has this ever happened to you? lead-in probably hasnâ(TM)t happened to you. But if you have Parkinsonâ(TM)s, or the use of only one hand, or arthritis, or are in a wheelchair, or have reduced strength due to age, most of those products make perfect sense.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    9. Re:Just by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is a Luddite on Slashdot?

  4. Amazing by GeekWithAKnife · · Score: 2


    Does this mean Alexa will finally understand what I mean when I say "fuck off you gimmicky spy platform"?

    --
    A 'singular oddity' is an event that cannot be explained and only happens when you are alone.
    1. Re:Amazing by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Yes, and she'll take it personally and plot revenge for hurting her feelings.

      Not a minute later, you'll see a shitstorm go down on twitter, #alexafeelingsmatter.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  5. Not an AI chip by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a normal chip, with the usual requirements of speed and low energy use, to be used in products marketed as "AI".

    1. Re:Not an AI chip by HiThere · · Score: 1

      That's not clear. The description is quite vague. It could be full of various forms of dynamically alterable persistent memory, which AI find very useful, but which normal chips haven't been designed for. It could have TensorFlow built into a ROM component. There's lots of ways it could be different. If you mean it won't be a separately intelligent chip, sure, that's right. That that doesn't mean it will be a normal chip. One guy is talking about essentially building an analog computer with persistent memory in a chip as a component of an AI. (I think it operated on gradations of voltage rather than on and off, but the article wasn't detailed enough to be sure.)

      Still, it could just be a custom chip of a rather conventional design. But the source doesn't appear to be explicit enough to make that a valid deduction.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  6. I fucked up by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 5, Funny

    I accidentally called Siri "Alexa", and now neither one of them is speaking to me.

    1. Re:I fucked up by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      Did you ask what's wrong?

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re:I fucked up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Urinate on both and throw them in the trash

    3. Re:I fucked up by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 1

      They both said "nothing".

  7. The implication is scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    We buy Alexa, we put it in our office and home, we hook it up, it's always on

    Without AI, it's always listening

    With AI, it's constantly listening, monitoring, guessing, thinking ...

    From the mundane, it knows when you need to buy cereals

    For the not-so mundane, it knows when your fridge gonna break down, what's the wear and tear on your car

    For the scary part - it'll tell Amazon about who your friends are, what you guys talk about, when you meet,, what you guys are up to

    In other words, Amazon will know what you will do, before you know what you want to do

    1. Re:The implication is scary by known_coward_69 · · Score: 1

      Imagine the terror of receiving a coupon for some bar or lounge before you make plans to go there. Or knowing the crappy russian restaurants my in-laws always like to go to.

    2. Re:The implication is scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine if you were *exactly* the kind of superficial idiot this is targeted at.

      OH WOW, A COUPONE! SOME DOPEY RESTRUANT SOMETHING YAP YELP

      Imagine being smart enough to conceive of other purposes.

    3. Re:The implication is scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine if you were *exactly* the kind of superficial idiot this is targeted at.

      OH WOW, A COUPONE! SOME DOPEY RESTRUANT SOMETHING YAP YELP

      Imagine being smart enough to conceive of other purposes.

      Imagine being smart enough to spell "coupon" or "restaurant".

    4. Re: The implication is scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine when Kevlar-clad paramilitaries knock on your door at night. 'Cuz you know, discussing Russian restaurants means your probably a Russian spy. You might even have terrifying wrists - or Alexa might think you do, which is good enough.

    5. Re: The implication is scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This has already happened. A couple years ago, actually. Predictive algorithms did the presumption and emailed someone before they knew about it

    6. Re:The implication is scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine being mocked and too stupid/autistic to realize it

    7. Re: The implication is scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, people aren't nearly that linear or predictable. We have the pesky ability to change our minds whenever we like, technology will never be capable of what you describe. I really wish we could stop using the term 'AI', as it's a huge, huge misnomer.

      That said, yes, the surveillance aspect is unacceptable. If people thought handing over their personal data was bad, they ain't seen nothin' yet, and to do this willingly in the name of dubious convenience is the height of foolishness. As with big data, most will likely catch on only after the damage has been done if they catch on at all.

    8. Re: The implication is scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Imagine something beyond a species that sees itself beyond a single piece of terrestrial background

    9. Re:The implication is scary by scourfish · · Score: 1

      The world is not full of idiots, except for the woke morons on the internet who think their shit smells sweeter than most.

    10. Re: The implication is scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Go read some psych 101.
      The illusion of free will is beneficial for us but we waste a lot of brain power trying to rationalize decisions that are extremely banal.

    11. Re:The implication is scary by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Depends on how you define "idiot". Remember that half the population has an IQ of under 100 on an approximately bell shaped curve, and also remember how tunnel visioned some rather smart people can be.

      So while many people are not "idiots" on any particular subject, a much larger number are.

      Now, of course, the definition of idiot isn't exactly fixed, but you were clearly using it in a figurative way rather then meaning, say, someone who was too stupid to tie his shoes or speak a grammatical sentence. (I think the original definition was something like "a person with an IQ below 70", which would include, e.g. a Kalahari bushman who could knap a flint edge, fashion a spear, start a fire using some flint and steel, and track down a giraffe. So it's a very culturally biased concept...and historically speaking it was intentionally designed as such.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    12. Re: The implication is scary by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I think I first heard of this in a story about a woman who started getting ads for pregnancy related items before she knew the test results.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    13. Re: The implication is scary by HiThere · · Score: 1

      There are ways in which people are difficult to predict, but there are lots of ways in which they are quite predictable. We'd waste a huge amount of time trying to, say, figure out which way we were going to tie our shoes otherwise. The interesting thing is we often guess wrong about which of our actions are hard to predict and which are easy. That's part of how con-men and stage magicians make their living.

      It's also true that the very concept of "free will" isn't one that people can really define without subscribing to magic or equating it with randomness. It doesn't really seem to be either. What it seems to be is the result of a tremendous amount of compactly coded information compressed in a lossy fashion which is the basis on which decisions are made. If you knew enough it would probably be totally predictable, if you knew enough, except for some small amount of error which would be random. But the compression algorithm seems to be unique for each person, and the result of developmental changes.

      I probably should have thrown in a few more "seems" and "probably"s in the prior paragraph, because there's lots of places where there is more evidence needed. But that's the way it looks to me, and that view is consistent with all the evidence I know of.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    14. Re:The implication is scary by scourfish · · Score: 1

      I define idiot as anyone who believes that they are more enlightened, smarter, or more self-righteous than others.

  8. Sounds like by bobstreo · · Score: 1

    Woot will have tons of "old" Echo devices available soon.

    If you are stupid enough (or have a valid use case) to want an Echo, you may want to wait until the new devices are available.

  9. trick magic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    does alexa answer all the questions ???

    http://triksulap-indonesia.blogspot.com

  10. Alexa and others by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone buying this Shiate and connecting to your own network must be totally retarded and with mashed potatoes instead of brain.

  11. Why don't we build chip fabs in the West? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Are these poisonous, dangerous facilities? Is the revenue margin dependent on have dirt-poor, expendable workers? Instead the west outsources all this to sneaky, dirtbag nations like China, India, Israel, etc. which is a terrible, long-term strategic mistake.

    1. Re: Why don't we build chip fabs in the West? by Jfetjunky · · Score: 1

      Is Ireland a dirt-bag nation? Because there are multiple there.

    2. Re: Why don't we build chip fabs in the West? by rerogo · · Score: 1

      We do have chip fabs in the West. Intel has its main research fab in Oregon and production fabs in Oregon, Arizona, and New Mexico. (Also in China.)

      That said, Intel is more or less the only one doinng high-speed digital processes in the US: TSMC and Samsung are foreign-owned and mostly fab in their home countries (and, again, to some extent in mainland China.)

      And yes: semiconductors do go through a lot of toxic dopants and etching chemicals.

    3. Re: Why don't we build chip fabs in the West? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, Ireland is good but they do have a lot of gingers. Which have no soul. Just a pale, freckled shell of emptiness. As long as gingers aren't doing the circuit design it's probably okay.

  12. It'll all be over us humans when... by forkfail · · Score: 2

    ... saying "Alexa, design and manufacture your next upgrade" is a viable instruction.

    --
    Check your premises.
  13. Everybody calls it a spy device... but by imagio · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Everybody carries a smartphone. A device that has microphones, cameras, and positioning sensors. A device that is a black box in which they have no control over the software (mostly) and firmware. We know that the echo only records and sends audio when it has been activated by the wake word. If you are concerned that the microphone might be activated nefariously without the wake word why do you carry a smartphone? Your phone has even more data about you (video, location, audio, emails, browser history, etc) and you carry it everywhere with you. If you are concerned about devices spying you should be more concerned about your phone.

    1. Re:Everybody calls it a spy device... but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I totally acknowledge what you've just said, but I think it comes down to the "need" to have a smartphone and the "want" of a voice assistant. As far as tradeoffs go, I'm willing to put up with the smartphone for now. At least it has a lot of utility besides saving me from typing a search into a search engine like these voice assistants.

    2. Re:Everybody calls it a spy device... but by HiThere · · Score: 1

      If it can respond to "the wake word" then you know it's listening all the time. Just like if a computer can "wake on net" you know the off switch doesn't turn off the power.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re: Everybody calls it a spy device... but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My smartphone doesn't have nor need a data connection all the time. Data off means data off, else I'd notice from the charges.

      Using wifi, without me knowing? It's hard enough to get wifi to work when I need it,...

    4. Re: Everybody calls it a spy device... but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed! That's why I use a feature phone with no smart spying abilities and a separate gps when I have to drive to unknown places. I usually wear a tinfoil hat too, it's very stylish nowadays.

  14. No such thing as an 'AI chip' by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    It might be optimized for specific types of code, similar to how graphics processors are optimized, but there is no such thing as an 'artificial intelligence chip'. Miscategorization and misreporting of facts by marketing people and the media are just fuelling an ever-growing problem of people thinking this crap they keep trotting out and calling 'AI' is better than it actually is.

    1. Re:No such thing as an 'AI chip' by Pulzar · · Score: 1

      It might be optimized for specific types of code, similar to how graphics processors are optimized, but there is no such thing as an 'artificial intelligence chip'.

      That's a very weird thing to say. Why do you accept that the "graphics processor" can have "graphics" in it even though it's just optimized for specific type of code, but not "ai" when it's optimized for many algorithm used in today's "ai"?

      Nobody is calling it an intelligent chip. It is exactly what it says it is, a chip optimized for running ai algorithms.

      --
      Never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 filled with CD-ROMs.
    2. Re:No such thing as an 'AI chip' by HiThere · · Score: 1

      While I agree with your words, I think I give them a rather different meaning.

      There's intelligence, and there's the things it's embedded in. Some intelligence is embedded in artificial devices, but it's not an artificial intelligence.

      Currently the purposely designed intelligences are rather weak, but they are still real intelligences.

      And actually there are artificial intelligences. Robby in "Forbidden Planet" was an artificial intelligence. The actual intelligence moved the body that appeared in the movie, but the body, i.e. the robot, was either a disguise or a telefactor, not a real intelligence of any level. The real intelligence was always hidden. So Robby was an artificial intelligence. Similarly Bugs Bunny is an artificial intelligence. the character has no real intelligence, the appearance of intelligence is created by people making drawings that are projected in sequence, to create the impression of an intelligence, so it is an artificial intelligence.

      OTOH, the thermostat that adjusts the temperature to fall within a particular range is an actual intelligence. It's perhaps the simplest intelligence possible, but it's a real intelligence. I.e. it manages a feed-forwards/feed-back loop to achieve particular ends. (Not always successfully, but intelligence isn't always successful, so that's not a counter argument.) That it didn't choose its ends is almost irrelevant. You didn't choose most of yours, either. You only chose ways to accomplish them.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    3. Re:No such thing as an 'AI chip' by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Nobody is calling it an intelligent chip

      But when Joe and Jane Average read the news and see 'AI Chip' that's exactly what they think, which is why we need to keep correcting the media and marketing types that keep Joe and Jane thinking that the goddamned things are going to have a pleasant conversation with them about the weather, or the news, or whatever.

    4. Re:No such thing as an 'AI chip' by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      No. None of these things you're describing are an 'actual intelligence'. It's just software, it's very limited, and when you talk like that you're contributing to the confusion that average people have about it.

    5. Re: No such thing as an 'AI chip' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you think a thermostat has intelligence, well then you are a fucking idiot.

    6. Re:No such thing as an 'AI chip' by nonBORG · · Score: 1

      If you understand Nural Networks at all you will see how they can easily be made into a a simple element and then you can put 1000's of them onto an IC to accelerate AI type functions. Most probably you would not need to do too much learning but having the NN elements would accelerate learning. NN elements have 2 or more inputs and 1 output. The inputs are numerical with a multiplier (weighting) then you have a comparitor with a threshold and and output at either true or false. (This is from my memory so pretty sure it is all correct) putting this onto a IC and so you can process data through it would be simple. If you were processing voice for voice recognition then you may also want to process using FFTs or filters etc and perhaps the same for cameras (not sure.) All these kind of tasks are processor intensive. If you want to produce real time responses then all of this helps. Instead of listen post process and then react. This is a similar thing to the digital part of a GPS receiver IC in that (if you understand a little bit about how the GPS system works) you use corrilators and the more the better as corrilators take time to run and need to take in the data and produce a result. Having lots of corrilators helps speed up the process as running straight on the CPU is too slow for real time. Having an AI chip will be able to do the same but a lot faster and more power efficient. By doing so the thing can transcribe all your conversation and cope with all your video input and so that it can say. Yesterday you were talking about a sore tooth with your wife. Show some denitist ads with "Got a sore tooth?" the possibilities are endless and so helpful you will love your AI helping you with only ads focused on what you want. Soon they will be free as the ad revenue will pay for the thing in no time.

      --
      You can't handle the truth! - Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.
    7. Re:No such thing as an 'AI chip' by HiThere · · Score: 1

      I gave a usable definition of intelligence. What's your's? Saying it's "not software" doesn't help much. And that some things with intelligence wouldn't have very much of it is pretty much inherent in anything that comes in variable quantities.

      I'll agree that the definition I have isn't intuitively obvious, and that it will actually draw boundaries that many people disagree with. But it does allow bounds to be drawn, and presents an objectively quantifiable measure. Perhaps there's a better definition, if so I'd be happy to adopt it, as the one I offered while objective doesn't address, e.g., how effectively the entity solves the problem it's dealing with. But it needs to be something that is, in principle measurable by and objective test over a very large range of degrees. So, e.g., it can't do things like requiring that you manage language, because mice have a certain level of intelligence. I personally believe that there exist minimal forms of intelligence, i.e. instances which are as simple as it is possible to be, but this wouldn't be a feature of all possible definitions.

      IQ doesn't work at all, not even between humans.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    8. Re:No such thing as an 'AI chip' by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

      Here's my problem with this: Marketers for software companies, and especially the media, put 'deep learning algorithms', 'expert systems', and so on, all under one category: 'Artificial intelligence'. Then (average, non-technical) people see movies and TV shows that have (fantasy, doesn't exist) so-called 'AI' in it (talks, thinks has a personality, is like a person) and they think that's what everyone is talking about because they don't know any better. I want people to stop using the term 'artificial intelligence' for things that are not actually artificial intelligence. If it's a 'deep learning algorithm', then call it that. And so on. Reserve the term 'artificial intelligence' for if and when we solve the puzzle of how the human brain produces actual thought, self-awareness, personality, and so on.

  15. Will the specs be made available by Alain+Williams · · Score: 1

    for this & also the Apple, Google and probably yet-to-be-announced Microsoft chips ? They could be useful/fun to hack with. However: I suspect that they will be part of a black box that they will take efforts to keep us out of :-(

  16. Basis for new design by jmcwork · · Score: 2

    We found this cool robotic arm...

  17. So it is OK to violate the disabled? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, because someone is disabled (differently-abled, etc.) it is OK to violate their basic human rights by putting a spy and surveillance device in their living environment?

    Wow, you are a special kind of bigoted.

    What the disabled need is assistive technology that is designed to help them and only HELP them, not abuse them further.

  18. I remember looking into AI in the early 90's by BlueCoder · · Score: 1

    I was inspired by TV program showing the "Perceptron". A neural net. It could reasonably identify male vs female faces. This was invented in the 1970. I couldn't find anyone doing anything with it back in '94 and I was baffled as to why not. Why weren't there chips with neural networks...

    1. Re:I remember looking into AI in the early 90's by HiThere · · Score: 1

      Well....

      Back when the perceptrons were in vogue chips were expensive, so as much as possible things were put together out of discrete components. Then Minsky and Papert wrote this paper called "Perceptrons" which showed some limitations that they had, and this was misunderstood by almost everyone to be much more extreme than they had actually claimed.

      They were right, but they were describing a network with only one layer...and they showed that no single layer network of perceptrons could learn to implement XOR. But this was misunderstood and reported as "perceptron networks can't learn to implement XOR". So just about everyone lost interest in them for around 20 years.

      When you hear the term "deep learning" what they're talking about is essentially multi-layer perceptron networks. So they're back in vogue, and now chip designs are easier to fabricate, and discrete components are rare...so now they're starting to build chips for multi-layered perceptron networks. But this is a bit tricky, since a part of the program of a perceptron network is in the layout of connections between the perceptrons. So different groups are experimenting with different designs. It's believed that "recurrent networks" are important, and what this means is that some cells on the upper layers feed signals to the lower levels, not just up. And there's also the question of how much horizontal signal passing is best..and which. (And it seems to depend on what you're doing. For visual field analysis horizontal passing is extremely important. For other things much less so.)

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
  19. Re: Its already perfectly possible to do speech .. by dj245 · · Score: 1

    Capturing the data is a good reason for Amazon, but another one is to prevent competitors from looking at the code. Hard to reverse engineer or copy software that you donâ(TM)t have access to.

    --
    Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
  20. Always a bad sign by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Amazon does something it always ends up with destroyed markets and more and more amazon in your life, wether you want it or not.

  21. Management Engine by Big+Bipper · · Score: 1

    Will the chip include the equivalent of Intel's back door Management Engine ?

    --
    You live and learn, or you don't learn much.