SatvikBeri a day ago

My wife is deaf, and we had one kid in 2023 and twins in 2025. There's been a noticeable improvement baby cry detection! In 2023, the best we could find was a specialized device that cost over $1,000 and has all sorts of flakiness/issues. Today, the built-in detection on her (android) phone + watch is better than that device, and a lot more convenient.

Damogran6 a day ago

I also got notification on my apple watch, while being away from the house, that the homepod mini heard our fire alarm going off.

A call home let us know that our son had set it off learning to reverse-sear his steak.

  • kstrauser 20 hours ago

    I live across the street from a fire station. Thank for you for diligence, little HomePod Mini, but I'm turning your notifications off now.

  • brandonb 21 hours ago

    If the fire alarm didn't go off, you didn't sear hard enough. :)

embedding-shape a day ago

Is that something you actually need AI for though? A device with a sound sensor and something that shines/vibrate a remote device when it detects sound above some threshold would be cheaper, faster detection, more reliable, easier to maintain, and more.

  • evilduck a day ago

    But your solution costs money in addition to the phone they already own for other purposes. And multiple things can make loud noises in your environment besides babies; differentiating between a police siren going by outside and your baby crying is useful, especially if the baby slept through the siren.

    The same arguments were said for blind people and the multitude of one-off devices that smartphones replaced, OCR to TTS, color detection, object detection in photos/camera feeds, detecting what denomination US bills are, analyzing what's on screen semantically vs what was provided as accessible text (if any was at all), etc. Sure, services for the blind would come by and help arrange outfits for people, and audiobook narrators or braille translator services existed, and standalone devices to detect money denominations were sold, but a phone can just do all of that now for much cheaper.

    All of these accessibility AI/ML features run on-device, so the knee-jerk anti-AI crowd's chief complaints are mostly baseless anyways. And for the blind and the deaf, carrying all the potential extra devices with you everywhere is burdensome. The smartphone is a minimal and common social and physical burden.

  • Aurornis 20 hours ago

    > more reliable

    I've worked on some audio/video alert systems. Basic threshold detectors produce a lot of false positives. It's common for parents to put white noise machines in the room to help the baby sleep. When you have a noise generating machine in the same room, you need more sophisticated detection.

    False positives are the fastest way to frustrate users.

  • jfindper a day ago

    >Is that something you actually need AI for though?

    Need? Probably not. I bet it helps though (false positives, etc.)

    >would be cheaper, faster detection, more reliable, easier to maintain, and more.

    Cheaper than the phone I already own? Easier to maintain than the phone that I don't need to do maintenance on?

    From a fun hacking perspective, a different sensor & device is cool. But I don't think it's any of the things you mentioned for the majority of people.

  • doug_durham 21 hours ago

    You are talking about a device of smart phone complexity. You need enough compute power to run a model that can distinguish noises. You need a TCP/IP stack and a wireless radio to communicate the information. At that point you have a smart phone. A simple sound threshold device would have too many false positives/negatives to be useful.