Live data from Hacker News

Siri AI

apple.com

281–290 of 746 posts

Re: Siri AI

#281
post #253

I read through the entire DMA rant that apple has here: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/06/due-to-dma-siri-ai-de... This feels like it could be solved with a list of permissions that the user has to turn on when using 3rd party AI. Apple already: 1) requires developers to submit ID to publish an app on the appstore (at least I had to after ~1000 downloads to be able to publish an update) 2) has strong kernel enfo…

It’s kind of funny that the EU’s regulation here would force Apple to allow options that are worse for user privacy. Apple is the least incentivized to farm data from its users; in fact, that’s a huge selling point. They mentioned it over and over and over in the WWDC keynote today. In my opinion, Apple is doing the right thing for users. It’s not like they have a huge revenue stream here. Yes, there will be some fea…

Your premise is incorrect; if apple truly wants to do the 'right thing for its users', it would allow choice. The fact that the current crop of likely alternate choices include quite a few companies and offerings that seem far more user hostile than apple's offering doesn't change that fact (it merely raises separate concerns that there need to be more laws such as the EU's DMA, not fewer).

However, even if your premise is correct, it does not matter.

In the end, trying to manage such products (require massive investment, have network effects, offer significant gatekeeping and rentseeking opportunities) is extremely problematic.

On one hand, the market cannot do it properly: There are tons of externalities, and, like e.g. building out rail, the absolutely gigantic barriers to entering the market means the existing players merge into a monopoly or oligopoly.

On the other, the product is too complex and too dependent on continuous evolution to officially turn it into a state-controlled / state-run monopoly (the solution many countries have deployed to solve e.g. how rail, or medical insurance, or road networks, end up in a terrible state if left up to the market).

So what is one to do?

The current crop of mostly US led large companies seem to have gone with a 'just trust me, bro!' argument, with some 'AI is so important you cannot put up any roadblocks at all!' sprinkled in.

And yet these companies time and again prove that they can't be trusted. Which is obvious and logical: Companies must conform to the law, but are otherwise amoral. Or rather, their 'moral' compass has nothing to do with human moral compasses: They must earn money for their shareholders, in whatever legal way they can find that is most efficient, paying as much attention to future company growth and health as its shareholders desire. That isn't just 'what they are incentivized to do' - that is what they are legally *required* to do.

And yet you've gone with a motif of 'but apple is the one company that is doing it right so lets just trust them.. bro'.

There *is* a solution:

Use the fact that the state has powers of persuasion that companies simply do not have. The threat of law, and the monopoly on violence.

Essentially, a state can simply tell a company: The populace have spoken and they value X (say, privacy). They value it a lot. You will deliver. At low cost. This is not a request, it is a demand. If you don't want to or can't, then we shall write laws to regulate you and then *everybody loses*.

Conceptually this works, in a weird game of chicken / madman theory: If the corporation in question believes that society will regulate them into oblivion unless they comply with society's demands even if this means society incurs a great cost, then the corporation *will comply*.

This has happened before. There is no actual law in the US that a movie gets a rating, and the movie industry pays for and manages the ratings of its movies entirely as an internal affair. And yet, in general, movie ratings are stellarly well run compared to what a government run institution would have done.

The reason *is* that threat. The movie industry decided to police itself because it was quite clear that if they did not, the government would have, at great cost to the movie making industry (and at significant cost to society as well, in the form primarily of much worse films).

For some reason that isn't entirely clear to me, CEOs of large corporations that deem themselves 'IT companies' do not understand this part. They will fight tooth and nail to fight every law, and especially in the US, perhaps due to extremely dire and long-term distrust by its populace in its own government, many of its citizens incorrectly side with its corporations on this idea, even though time and again corporations prove that they have no allegiance other than to the almighty dollar (which, to be clear, is not a complaint. That is how society has set them up. My only complaint is that e.g. you seem to have forgotten that this is how it works).

Hence, given that the system works on, in essence, fear / coercion, the only right answer is to do an attitude adjustment, find a massive club, and beat a whole bunch of IT companies into absolute pulp until the remaining CEOs understand.

And before you make a note about the brash, medieval nature of that comment - it is already clear that these CEOs who think they are God's Greatest Gift To This Planet, are already meekly running, tail between their legs, to kiss the pinky ring of a personalist wannabe emperor president. They are _clearly_ motivated by such fear and _clearly_ cannot be trusted to rise to the occasion and be a new form of benevolent leadership for the citizenry.

I wish they were. It'd be so much easier.

Re: Siri AI

#282
Microsoft cannot compete in browser race and has to adopt Chromium.

Apple cannot compete in AI and has to adopt Gemini

Google is a really amazing company.

Re: Siri AI

#283

I didn't really see anything that knocked my socks off. Mostly, it's the promise that Siri now works in the way in which they said it would work a few years ago, when it didn't. I do like the addition of Siri in the context menu, though. I can see that being useful.

It’s the same broken promise every year. All I want is for Siri to set an alarm and open my blinds. That’s enough for me. Makes you wonder how much money Apple has poured into Siri over the years.

Jokes aside, I have been using siri to control my smart home and set my alarm for nearly ten years now. I haven't really had problems with basic stuff like this.

Re: Siri AI

#284

I read through the entire DMA rant that apple has here: https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2026/06/due-to-dma-siri-ai-de... This feels like it could be solved with a list of permissions that the user has to turn on when using 3rd party AI. Apple already: 1) requires developers to submit ID to publish an app on the appstore (at least I had to after ~1000 downloads to be able to publish an update) 2) has strong kernel enfo…

> This feels like it could be solved with a list of permissions that the user has to turn on when using 3rd party AI.

The device won't be able to ask for significantly more permissions than Apple asks for their own model for regulatory reasons, nor will it be able to convey the seriousness of granting the permission (e.g. immediately give unrestricted access to the vast majority of personal information/documents stored on the device).

But Apple also architected their system to justify not having constant permission prompts for access to sensitive data. And for regulatory reasons they also can't mandate that competing models have the same architecture.

The regulators and Apple (along with hopefully other AI companies) will need to work together to determine longer-term stable path forward.

Re: Siri AI

#285

I switched from android to iOS 7 years ago and I’ve actually been debating going back just because of how bad iOS is at AI. And every other facet of my life, I am finding ways for it to save my time on an almost daily basis. And yet on iOS, just finding something from a text Message is still a nightmare. Siri seems to rarely get better and sometimes actually get worse.

> And yet on iOS, just finding something from a text Message is still a nightmare This has been a problem on iOS since the dawn of time and has nothing to do with AI

Nope, it got markedly worse since AI. You used to be able to search for string literals, so if you remembered one obtuse phrase from a group chat, you could pull it up instantly. Now this 'intent' search will try to search for what it thinks you want, not what you typed. AFAIK, there is no way to search for literals anymore, thanks to AI.

Re: Siri AI

#286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s worrisome, but it’s also worth pointing out that no one else has succeeded at it, or even gotten close. It’s easy to forget that there are not good well-integrated person AI solutions yet, it’s just chat bots. I think it’s just harder than a lot of people think it is.

I think it's fair to say that OpenAI has at least partially won the "consumer AI" segment.

Yeah but OpenAI isn't building phones. The real winning would be Google's deep integration of Gemini into all of their products.

Also, even when you DO get AI into products, consumers might not like them. The overuse of copilot led to a barrage of Microslop jokes, for example

Re: Siri AI

#287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Requiring at least an iPhone 15 Pro also seems like a mistake, unless it’s for actual hardware reasons. The 15 is only 3 years old, this requirement cuts off a lot of potential users I think

[dead]

They would have to build the product twice one for mobile chips and one for server, and then there would be functionality discrepancies. Or even worse, the on server one might work better than the on device one that newer phone users get.

If you want hosted AI you can already install the Gemini app or whatever. The only advantage Apple can offer is something that runs on device.

Re: Siri AI

#288

I switched from android to iOS 7 years ago and I’ve actually been debating going back just because of how bad iOS is at AI. And every other facet of my life, I am finding ways for it to save my time on an almost daily basis. And yet on iOS, just finding something from a text Message is still a nightmare. Siri seems to rarely get better and sometimes actually get worse.

It’s the keyboard for me. I don’t remember making as many typing mistakes when I was on an Android phone. It’s also infuriating trying to “select all” for copy or move the cursor to beginning with the spacebar motion. I swear it’s like I’m using a phone in a dream sometimes.

Re: Siri AI

#289
post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1Password gives you access to previous passwords you had for that reason. Unfortunately not for other fields like email, notes etc… IMHO the perfect password app could just keep all previous versions of any field until the user deletes the history.

1Password does do full previous versions. It might be a newer feature, I’m only seeing passwords, not full versions, prior to 2018.

All that data is lost when you migrate accounts though. I went from an old to a new 1P account and did the official way to copy (NOT exporting it to a text file and re-importing that way, actually copying it from the interface) and no version history persisted :/

Re: Siri AI

#290
post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s kind of funny that the EU’s regulation here would force Apple to allow options that are worse for user privacy. Apple is the least incentivized to farm data from its users; in fact, that’s a huge selling point. They mentioned it over and over and over in the WWDC keynote today. In my opinion, Apple is doing the right thing for users. It’s not like they have a huge revenue stream here. Yes, there will be some fea…

> Apple is doing the right thing for users. The right thing for users would be to allow user choice, and for Apple to compete fairly. Apple allowing third party access doesn't automatically mean user data gets hoovered up by OpenAI, Anthropic, etc. It just means users now get the choice, if they want to make that choice. Users could stay with Siri/Apple if they care about what Apple is offering, or choose to accept t…

And why is that a good thing? The average user can't even spell Anthropic. Why do you think they can safely pick a third-party model provider that could harvest the hell out of their conversations? The control of ecosystem is part of the privacy and security. My mom's Android phone has like 100 apps that she had no idea how they were downloaded. For real user choices, the vast majority of users just want a phone that they can trust and don't have to be a techie to avoid being exploited. They can choose to buy a phone that can be built from legos, OR they can choose to buy a phone from someone they trust to get the privacy and security taken care of for them. This is the real user choice.
Post reply on HN