Something remarkable happened the other day: I tried an AI device I didn’t instinctively loathe. It was a smart ring, created by two former Meta Platforms Inc. employees, that finally met some of the key criteria I think about when it comes to wearable tech and artificial intelligence, an intersection already fraught with failure and no shortage of justifiable anger.
Let’s call it the Molotov’s Test — the likelihood of attracting unwanted attention as a result of using wearable technology, so-named after one of San Francisco’s best dive bars, where a wearer of the much-maligned Google Glass headset was harassed in 2014. Of course, that’s not to be condoned. But the Molotov’s Test serves as a useful starting framework: I don’t think any new device can go mainstream without passing it.
The test requires a few things. First, you shouldn’t look as if you’re obviously wearing a piece of technology. At least, it shouldn’t overwhelm your entire appearance, like sneakers with a sharp suit. This is something that can be alleviated with great design — think AirPods — but the key is that it must blend in.
Second, the tech must not make those around you uncomfortable such as recording them without their consent or awareness or capturing images in spaces where cameras are not welcome.
And third, the device must do something truly useful to earn the real estate of your body. It’s a higher bar than being open to having something in your pocket.
These details are important to think about as AI companies look to disrupt our reliance on smartphone screens in favor of something else. OpenAI and former Apple Inc. design head Jony Ive are working on an AI-enabled non-phone device. Meta and Apple (reportedly) are betting on AI-enhanced eyewear. Meta’s Ray Bans are already on the market and have sold, from what we know, single-digit millions of units. But clearly, Meta’s Ray Bans will be a niche product because even glasses indistinguishable from a normal pair require those who don’t wear them to have reason enough to start.
The Stream Ring, made by the startup Sandbar, is the first AI-focused device I’ve tried that comes close to passing the Molotov’s Test. It is worn on your dominant index finger and contains a microphone you activate by pressing the ring with your thumb. It records you and only you, a discreet interaction those around you shouldn’t feel threatened by — you can whisper at it in the same manner as a Secret Service agent talking into his cuff. It is connected by Bluetooth to the Stream smartphone app that does the work of computing your inputs. “I would describe what we’re building as somewhere between a notes app and thinking tool,” said Mina Fahmi, Sandbar’s co-founder. (He and fellow co-founder Kirak Hong met at CTRL-Labs, the maker of a neural band that was acquired by Meta in 2019 for an undisclosed amount.)
Speaking “what’s a good pasta recipe for tonight?” into the ring will prompt the app to hash out a few ideas and then create a note called “grocery list” populated with ingredients. From my short demonstration, this was highly intuitive — if I mention needing bacon later that same day, it will add this to the grocery list note even if I don’t specifically ask and even if I’ve used the ring for other tasks or list-making in the interim.
The Stream app acts as a companion, too, like ChatGPT, but with an interesting twist: During setup, you are prompted to recite a short phrase that will make the voice the AI responds to you in your own. Freaky? At first, and you can pick a different voice if you really want. But keeping it to your own underlines the device’s aim to be “self extension” rather than an independent AI agent, Fahmi said.
It also, one would imagine, reduce the likelihood of developing an unhealthy attachment to the AI. That’s an important differentiator from devices such as the “Friend” pendant, which has been billed as a constant companion — a sales pitch that has caused such unease its ads have been defaced across the New York subway system.
Put to the Molotov’s Test, the Stream Ring breezes through the first two parts: It is subtle on your finger and does not infringe the rights of those around you. But it’s the third part of the Molotov’s Test where the Stream Ring, in its current iteration, perhaps falls short.
While most of us have 10 fingers, that likely doesn’t mean we’re in the market for 10 tech rings — I can’t see people ever wearing more than one. While the Stream Ring does its one thing very well — it takes your audio and communicates it to the app — it is still just one thing. Just like the iPhone combined several big functions — iPod, phone, internet communicator — to create the “one device,” the ring that will prove to be the breakthrough AI device will also need to combine several functions — such as health tracking — before most will find value for money from the $249 asking price.
But, directionally, the Stream Ring is it. Ive said recently that you know a complicated question has been answered when an idea seems “obvious, as if there wasn’t possibly another rational solution to the problem.” For me, the ring as the de facto AI input device is that obvious and rational solution. People have worn rings as accessories for centuries, and the popularity of the Oura health ring shows the introduction of tech onto our fingers is something regular people are open to embrace. A ring requires one fewer hand to engage than a smart watch. It is less socially awkward, and more hygienic, than an earbud. Most important, in this day and age, it’s not an affront to human decency. This is the progress AI advocates have been seeking.
A message from Advisor Perspectives and VettaFi: Discover something new! Click here to register for our upcoming webcasts.
Bloomberg News provided this article. For more articles like this please visit
bloomberg.com.
Read more articles by Dave Lee
